「evidence-based」の検索結果

Use before any deployment or completion claim. Enforces test gates, evidence-based verification, and frontend safety checks. No deploy without passing. No claims without evidence.

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 websites and landing pages for conversion issues and design evidence-based A/B tests. Use when the user mentions "landing page isn't converting", "conversion rate", "A/B test", "why visitors leave", or "objection handling". Covers funnel mapping, persuasion assets, and objection/counter-objection frameworks. For overall marketing strategy, see one-page-marketing. For usability issues, see ux-heuristics.

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。

Customer discovery framework using Jobs-To-Be-Done theory — uncover the functional, social, and emotional jobs customers hire products to do. Produces JTBD canvases with job statements, outcome metrics, and competing solutions. Use alongside cm-brainstorm-idea for evidence-based product decisions.

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。

Prevent AI hallucination and ensure evidence-based responses when analyzing code or making suggestions. Use when: analyzing code, making recommendations, providing options, or when user asks about confidence/certainty. Keywords: certainty, assumption, inference, evidence, source, 確定性, 推測, 假設, 來源, 證據.

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。

Specialized research and analysis prompt methodology for Claude. Provides 11 tested approaches (3 identity, 4 reasoning, 4 output) for data analysis, policy research, systematic evidence review, investigative research, and research-specific deliverables. Use when building prompts for quantitative data interpretation, evidence-based policy recommendations, literature reviews, causal analysis, hypothesis-driven investigation, or briefing documents. Trigger on: "prompt for data analysis," "research prompt," "policy brief prompt," "literature review prompt," "prompt for investigating," "systematic review prompt," "build a prompt for evidence synthesis," "causal analysis prompt," "briefing document prompt." Also use when user describes a research or analytical task and needs a structured Claude prompt for it. Do NOT use for evaluating existing prompts (use rootnode-prompt-validation if available) or auditing Claude Projects (use rootnode-project-audit if available).

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。

Guide a person in systematic observation of systems, patterns, or phenomena. AI coaches neutral attention, field notes methodology, pattern recognition, hypothesis formation, and structured reporting for debugging, research, and system understanding. Use when a person wants to understand a system's behavior before intervening, when someone keeps jumping to conclusions and needs the discipline of observation first, when preparing an evidence-based report, or when studying team dynamics or process effectiveness through direct observation.

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。

Reliability gate for answers. Forces evidence-based reasoning, explicit uncertainty, and “insufficient information” instead of guesses. Use when user says “be 100% sure”, “no hallucinations”, “only if verified”, “grounded answer”, or when stakes are high.

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。

Reliability gate for answers. Forces evidence-based reasoning, explicit uncertainty, and “insufficient information” instead of guesses. Use when user says “be 100% sure”, “no hallucinations”, “only if verified”, “grounded answer”, or when stakes are high.

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。

万能复刻 / universal website copy-remix workflow with evidence-based reference recon. Use when the user wants to copy, clone, recreate, remix, migrate, or rebuild any reference website's look, interaction feel, scroll rhythm, hero motion, layout structure, visual system, deployed static assets, or landing-page experience into a new website. Trigger for requests like 万能复刻, 万能网站复制, 复刻官网, 一比一复刻, 授权复制, 高仿但换产品, 参考某官网做自己的官网, RMUX 风格, Linear/Raycast/Apple/Vercel 风格迁移, hero 动效复刻, 滚动体验复刻, 官网换皮重构, 网站侦察, 复刻验收, WebGL/Canvas/Three.js 效果还原.

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。

Creates specialized AI agents with optimized system prompts using the official 4-phase SOP methodology from Desktop .claude-flow, combined with evidence-based prompting techniques and Claude Agent SDK implementation. Use this skill when creating production-ready agents for specific domains, workflows, or tasks requiring consistent high-quality performance with deeply embedded domain knowledge.

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。

Improve an existing skill or repository through isolated proposals, reproducible evaluation and evidence-based acceptance. Use for self-evolve or skill improvement.

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。

Write balanced, evidence-based performance reviews for employees. Covers achievements, development areas, and goal setting using the SBI (Situation-Behavior-Impact) feedback model. Produces reviews that are fair, legally defensible, and growth-oriented. Use during annual or semi-annual review cycles. Do not use for disciplinary actions, PIPs, or compensation calculations.

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。

Investigation flow (Glob -> Grep -> Read), evidence-based research with file:line references, structured output format for AI consumption. Use for pattern discovery, implementation research, and codebase investigation.

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。

Provide constructive, evidence-based research mentoring feedback on student manuscripts, proposals, analyses, code, figures, and presentations. Use for advisor-style review that teaches the next improvement without impersonating an advisor or making unsupported scientific judgments.

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。

Explore and debate options with fresh documentation and research before committing. Use when facing a real decision with multiple plausible approaches — library/framework choice, architecture call, API or schema design, algorithm selection, or any communication / strategy call where being wrong has cost. Enumerates relevant research domains, looks up current docs and evidence-based methods, weighs options on correctness and elegance, resists bloat. Do NOT use for divergent ideation (brainstorm), extracting user intent (elicit), or reviewing already-written code (quality-review).

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。

4-phase systematic debugging methodology with root cause analysis and evidence-based verification. Use when debugging complex issues.

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 Azure application and infrastructure issues with a structured, evidence-based workflow. Use this skill when users ask to troubleshoot outages, latency, failures, configuration drift, or anomalies. Root cause analysis using logs, metrics, traces, and dependency mapping.

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 stuck on approach (not debugging). Strategic unsticking via 7 non-default techniques: simplification cascades, collision-zone thinking, meta-pattern recognition, inversion, scale game, first principles, via negativa. Triggers on complexity spiraling, innovation block, recurring patterns across domains, forced-assumption solutions, scale uncertainty, told-it's-impossible, or bloated systems needing subtraction. For evidence-based root-cause debugging, use mk:sequential-thinking instead.

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 problem requires structured step-by-step reasoning before acting. Prevents jumping to conclusions or guessing root causes without evidence. Triggers on complex debugging, multi-step analysis, hypothesis verification, or when mk:fix invokes diagnosis phase. NOT for being stuck on approach (too many implementations, forced assumptions, innovation block) — use mk:problem-solving instead.

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。

Systematic debugging with root cause investigation. Produces a diagnostic report; mk:fix owns remediation and mk:build-fix owns compile/build failures. Use when asked to "debug this", "fix this bug", "why is this broken", "investigate this error", or "root cause analysis". Proactively suggest when the user reports errors, unexpected behavior, or is troubleshooting why something stopped working. NOT for applying fixes without investigation (see mk:fix); NOT for step-by-step evidence-based reasoning (see mk:sequential-thinking).

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 user says "simmer this", "refine this", "hone this", "iterate on this", or asks to improve a specific artifact over multiple rounds. Runs an iterative refinement loop with investigation-first judges that read the code, understand the problem, and propose evidence-based improvements. Auto-selects single judge or multi-judge board based on complexity. Works on any artifact type: documents, prompts, specs, emails, creative writing, API designs, pipelines, codebases. Supports multi-file workspace targets, runnable evaluators, and open-ended optimization (model selection, pipeline topology, prompt tuning).

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。

Project gene annotations across genomes using TOGA (Kirilenko 2023 whole-genome-alignment chain-based projection with intactness classification), CESAR 2.0 (Sharma, Schwede & Hiller 2017 codon-aware exon projection), LiftOff (Shumate & Salzberg 2021 reference-based annotation transfer), Liftover (UCSC), GeMoMa (Keilwagen 2019 evidence-based projection), and Comparative Annotation Toolkit (CAT). Use when transferring annotations from a well-annotated reference to query genome(s), classifying gene-loss vs gene-intact across many genomes at scale, building Zoonomia-style comparative annotations across hundreds of mammals or birds (Kirilenko 2023), detecting pseudogenization, projecting alternative isoforms, or selecting between WGA-anchored (TOGA) vs ortholog-based (LiftOff) annotation transfer strategies.

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。

Provides a checklist of five evidence-based measures to enhance the technical success of adrenal venous sampling procedures. Triggers include when preparing for AVS and asking 'How can I maximize success rate?' or troubleshooting failed attempts.

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。

Provides evidence-based guidelines for preoperative optimization and postoperative monitoring in patients with primary aldosteronism undergoing adrenalectomy. Triggers include when planning surgery or starting treatment and asking 'What perioperative care is needed?' or managing complications such as resistant hypertension, hypokalemia, or suspected cortisol co-secretion.

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。