「concrete」の検索結果

List the fully-qualified C# type names of every concrete `UnityEngine.Component` subclass available in the project. Paginated (default 5/page, max 500). Use this to find a valid `componentName` for 'gameobject-component-add'.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Swift Concurrency review and remediation for Swift 6.2+. Use when asked to review Swift Concurrency usage, improve concurrency compliance, or fix Swift concurrency compiler errors in a feature or file. Concrete actions include adding Sendable conformance, applying @MainActor annotations, resolving actor isolation warnings, fixing data race diagnostics, and migrating completion handlers to async/await.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Competitor page gap analysis — take a query you want to win and the pages currently outranking you, and produce a concrete brief on what to add or change to compete. Compares content depth and coverage (subtopics they cover that you don't), structure (headings, format, tables, media), search-intent match, E-E-A-T signals, schema/rich-result eligibility, internal linking, and on-page optimization — across your page vs. the top-ranking competitors. Use this skill whenever the user wants to know why a competitor outranks them on a specific query, what a top-ranking page does better, a content-gap analysis against specific competitor URLs, or a brief to beat a specific SERP. Trigger on: "why does competitor X outrank me", "content gap analysis", "competitor page analysis", "what does the top result have that I don't", "how do I beat this page", "analyze competitor pages", "SERP gap", "compete for [keyword]". For seed keyword discovery use /keyword-research; for a content calendar use /content-planner.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

批评与自我批评：在工作完成、阶段验收、收到批评或同类错误反复出现时，对成果和过程做诚实、具体、基于事实的审视，输出可执行的改进项，并处理外来批评而不辩解。触发信号包括 review、复盘、审查、"帮我看看有没有问题"、"你确定吗"；任务刚开始或只是单步查询时不触发。 English: Criticism and self-criticism. After delivery, at a review checkpoint, on receiving criticism, or when the same mistake recurs, examine the result and the process honestly and concretely, produce actionable fixes, and accept valid criticism without defensiveness. Triggers include review, retrospective, audit, "check this for problems", "are you sure"; skip at the start of a task or for one-step lookups.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Codex-only team orchestration: run a named team of cooperating Codex workers with durable, script-managed state. MUST USE when the user asks Codex to create, run, coordinate, inspect, archive, or delete a team of agents/threads/sessions, or to work on something as a team in parallel. FIRST inspects the active tool surface (checking tool_search for deferred tools) and tells the user the route: native MultiAgentV2 agents (flat spawn_agent with task_name) when available, Codex App threads as the fallback, or a plain-subagent split when neither set exists. The main session is always the leader; members are defined by a concrete part, ownership area, or perspective - never a vague job role; a bundled cross-platform script writes the .omo/teams state plus an auto-generated member field manual. Use a team when the work is not perfectly isolated but parallelizing helps; use plain subagents when scope is perfectly isolated or the goal is ambiguous. Triggers: team mode, teammode, make a team, run as a team, team of agents, coordinate threads, parallel Codex threads, archive the team.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audit the developer experience of a product, SDK, docs site, or SKILL.md by dropping multiple Claude subagents at it with only a tiny task prompt and real tools (WebFetch, Bash, Write). Agents must discover the docs themselves, install deps, ask for credentials if needed, and attempt real execution. The skill captures each agent's trace — tool calls, retries, wall time, errors — and scores on Setup Friction, Speed, Efficiency, Error Recovery, and Doc Quality, then emits an HTML report with an A–F grade and concrete fixes. Use when the user asks to audit agent experience, test a skill, audit docs for agents, check if a SDK is agent-friendly, validate a SKILL.md, measure agent DX, or benchmark how painful onboarding is for an AI agent. Triggers: 'audit agent experience', 'test this skill', 'audit docs for agents', 'is my SDK agent-friendly', 'run a DX audit', 'agent experience test', 'test my docs', 'how do agents do with my product'.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Investigate outliers, rare events, spikes, and suspicious records in datasets. Use as an explicit anomaly-analysis helper when you want concrete anomaly-detection workflow guidance, not generic data validation or end-to-end ML ownership.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Route open-ended NVFLARE advice and only conversion requests whose preliminary source inspection reports unresolved or conflicting ownership; never load this skill merely to inspect a concrete conversion request before selecting its detected framework converter.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when a concrete ./holohub command fails, hangs, regresses, or returns wrong output and needs reproducible diagnosis and verification.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Interactive knowledge graph analysis. Routes natural language questions to graph scripts, interprets results in domain vocabulary, and suggests concrete actions. Triggers on "/graph", "/graph health", "/graph triangles", "find synthesis opportunities", "graph analysis".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Compile-time dependency injection in Golang using google/wire — wire.NewSet, wire.Build, wire.Bind (interface→concrete), wire.Struct, wire.Value, wire.InterfaceValue, wire.FieldsOf, cleanup functions, //go:build wireinject injector files, and generated wire_gen.go. Apply when using or adopting google/wire, when the codebase imports `github.com/google/wire`, or when wiring an application graph at compile time via `wire.Build`. For runtime DI with reflection, see `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-uber-dig` skill.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Raw, anti-design aesthetic inspired by concrete architecture with unadorned elements, jarring layouts, and functional minimalism.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Review skills in any project using a dual-axis method: (1) deterministic code-based checks (structure, scripts, tests, execution safety) and (2) LLM deep review findings. Use when you need reproducible quality scoring for `skills/*/SKILL.md`, want to gate merges with a score threshold (for example 90+), or need concrete improvement items for low-scoring skills. Works across projects via --project-root.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Screen US equities for parabolic exhaustion patterns and generate conditional pre-market short plans, then evaluate intraday trigger fires from live 5-min bars. Phase 1 daily 5-factor scorer (MA extension / acceleration / volume climax / range expansion / liquidity), Phase 2 per-candidate plans for ORL break / first-red 5-min / VWAP fail with explicit borrow / SSR / manual-confirmation gating, Phase 3 one-shot intraday FSM that detects trigger fires and resolves concrete share counts. Covers Phase 1 + Phase 2 + Phase 3.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

SUPERSEDED by /claudex-loop (formerly /crucible; its docs-aware mode covers this variant) — prefer that skill unless you explicitly want this one. Two-act plan hardening with living documentation. ACT 1 (you ↔ Claude) — Claude interviews you relentlessly about a plan, one question at a time, challenging it against your project's existing domain model and glossary (CONTEXT.md), sharpening fuzzy terms, stress-testing with concrete scenarios, cross-referencing code, and updating CONTEXT.md + ADRs inline as decisions crystallise. ACT 2 (Claude ↔ Codex) — Claude writes the locked plan to PLAN.md and OpenAI Codex adversarially reviews it in a read-only sandbox (VERDICT:APPROVED/REVISE), Claude revises and re-submits to the SAME Codex session until APPROVED or a MAX_ROUNDS cap, then you sign off before any code. Use when the user says "/grill-with-docs-codex", "grill me against the docs then have codex review", "stress-test this against our domain model then get a second model on it", or is about to build something high-stakes in a project with established terminology/ADRs and wants alignment, documentation, AND a cross-model sanity check. Builds on Matt Pocock's grill-with-docs (MIT). NOT for reviewing already-written code (use /codex:review) and NOT for trivial changes.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Have Codex implement a concrete work order and have Claude independently inspect the final changes. Preserves the explicit Codex builder choice; use claudex-loop for host-based planning and automatic reviewer selection.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Sets up AWS Resilience Hub v2 from scratch: creates resilience policies with SLO targets, registers systems and user journeys, onboards services with input sources, and runs a first failure mode assessment. Applies when the user wants to get started with Resilience Hub v2, create a policy, onboard a service, or run an assessment — including creating one concrete policy with specific availability/RTO/RPO targets and a DR approach for a single service (even a tier-1 one). Does not apply to FIS experiments or ARC routing controls.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Diagnose Algolia request, credential, index, task, and query failures from concrete evidence. Use when an integration returns 4xx or 5xx responses, stale results, or unexpected empty hits. Trigger with "debug Algolia error", "Algolia 403", or "Algolia search failed".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Generate OpenEnv environments from a concrete use case (for example, "generate an env for the library textarena"). Use when asked to design or implement a new environment under envs/ by researching a target library/API, selecting matching OpenEnv examples, asking key implementation questions, and building models/client/server/openenv.yaml. Do not use for model training or evaluation tasks.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Transform learning content (like YouTube transcripts, articles, tutorials) into actionable implementation plans using the Ship-Learn-Next framework. Use when user wants to turn advice, lessons, or educational content into concrete action steps, reps, or a learning quest.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Produces design reference imagery before implementation — screen concepts, layout directions, and flows for web or mobile that make a verbal brief concrete enough to argue with. Use this when a brief needs visualizing before anyone builds, when comparing layout directions, when handing a developer a target, or when stakeholders are describing different things with the same words.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Assesses whether a medical research topic is worth starting now by separating true novelty from pseudo-novelty, auditing real feasibility under stated resource constraints, and forcing a concrete start / narrow / redesign / stop decision. Always require explicit assumptions and never fabricate references, datasets, resource availability, precedent studies, or publication claims.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Extracts concrete unmet clinical needs from guidelines, reviews, real-world studies, and clinical-practice evidence. Use this skill when a user wants to turn broad medical research value into specific clinical pain points such as weak early detection, poor risk stratification, treatment-response heterogeneity, monitoring gaps, diagnostic delay, undertreatment, overtreatment, or implementation failure. Always ground unmet-need claims in retrieved evidence and distinguish true care gaps from generic statements of importance.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Spawn three parallel review subagents over the active transcript, surface learnings, and route each to a concrete edit on an existing skill. Use when the user says reflect.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。