1.7万 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Review and summarise any contract or legal agreement. Use when asked to review a contract, check an agreement, flag legal risks, or summarise key clauses. Produces a structured review with key terms, flagged clauses, risk rating, and plain English summary. Not a substitute for qualified legal advice.
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。
Prepare for and run a product requirements review (需求评审 / PRD 评审会) the way Chinese internet teams do it: a pre-read the engineers, testers and designers can challenge, the questions each role will ask, the meeting run sheet and a written conclusion (通过 / 有条件通过 / 不通过). Use when asked 帮我准备需求评审, PRD 评审会怎么开, 评审前检查一下我的 PRD, 研发会问什么问题, or prepare my requirements review in Chinese. Produces a readiness check of the PRD, a role-by-role question bank with answer points, a 60-minute run sheet, and the review minutes template with the conclusion and follow-ups.
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 a bill of materials for cost, risk, and supply exposure — cost rollup, top-10 cost drivers, single-source and EOL risk, MOQ vs forecast mismatch, cost-down candidates, and tariff/logistics sensitivity. Use when asked to review a BOM, find cost-down opportunities, check component sourcing risk, or sanity-check BOM cost against target. Produces a structured BOM review with a cost driver Pareto, risk flags per line, and a prioritised cost-down list.
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 an LLM agent design and find where it will be unreliable, expensive, or unsafe. Use when asked to review an agent architecture, critique a multi-step/tool-using agent, debug an agent that loops or goes off-task, or harden an agent before launch. Produces a structured review — task fit, control flow, tools, memory/context, failure handling, cost, and safety — with prioritised findings and fixes.
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。
Analyze KiCad projects and PDF schematics: schematics, PCB layouts, Gerbers, footprints, symbols, netlists, and design rules. Reviews designs for bugs, traces nets, cross-references schematic to PCB, extracts BOM data, checks DRC/ERC, DFM, power trees, and regulator circuits. Every finding carries a confidence label and evidence source with trust_summary rollup. Analyzes PDF schematics from dev boards, reference designs, eval kits, and datasheets. Supports KiCad 5–10. Use whenever the user mentions .kicad_sch, .kicad_pcb, .kicad_pro, PCB design review, schematic analysis, PDF schematics, reference designs, Gerber files, DRC/ERC, netlist issues, BOM extraction, signal tracing, power budget, DFM, or wants to understand, debug, compare, or review any hardware design. Also for "check my board", "review before fab", "what's wrong with my schematic", "is this ready to order", "check my power supply", "verify this circuit", OSHWA certification readiness, or any electronics/PCB design question.
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。
Open image shots (screenshots, snapshot baselines, montages, renders) in ONE macOS Preview window so the user can eyeball them. Use when the user asks to open / show / pull up / review shots in Preview or Finder, or right after producing visual artifacts the user should look at before signing off.
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。
Code review for PRs or staged changes. >80% confidence threshold. Verdict: APPROVE, REQUEST CHANGES, or COMMENT. Triggers: review, pr, code 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。
Analyze KiCad projects and PDF schematics: schematics, PCB layouts, Gerbers, footprints, symbols, netlists, and design rules. Reviews designs for bugs, traces nets, cross-references schematic to PCB, extracts BOM data, checks DRC/ERC, DFM, power trees, and regulator circuits. Every finding carries a confidence label and evidence source with trust_summary rollup. Analyzes PDF schematics from dev boards, reference designs, eval kits, and datasheets. Supports KiCad 5–10. Use whenever the user mentions .kicad_sch, .kicad_pcb, .kicad_pro, PCB design review, schematic analysis, PDF schematics, reference designs, Gerber files, DRC/ERC, netlist issues, BOM extraction, signal tracing, power budget, DFM, or wants to understand, debug, compare, or review any hardware design. Also for "check my board", "review before fab", "what's wrong with my schematic", "is this ready to order", "check my power supply", "verify this circuit", OSHWA certification readiness, or any electronics/PCB design question.
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。
Produce and continuously maintain ONE living review document for a multi-item session — a cockpit header (Progress checklist, Working folder, Context) plus per-item review cards that you approve or request changes on directly in the doc or side panel. Use whenever a session has multiple deliverables you need to review/approve (meeting-processing + planning, multi-ticket work, briefs with several drafts, any "do X, then plan/draft Y and Z"). The doc is the interaction surface: you edit it (or reply in chat) to approve/change; the agent keeps it live as work progresses.
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 reviewing a DataFusion Comet pull request. Covers the workflow that applies to every PR and routes to the area-specific review skills for expressions, FFI, memory management, shuffle, and Iceberg writes. Provides guidance to a human reviewer rather than posting comments.
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 reviewing a DataFusion Comet pull request that adds or changes a Spark expression, its Scala serde, its protobuf message, or its native Rust implementation. Load alongside review-comet-pr, which covers the parts of the review that apply to every PR.
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 generated or changed documentation before it ships — READMEs, API references, docstrings, PHPDoc/JSDoc, changelogs, tutorials, and doc sites. Best used reactively after an agent writes or edits docs, after code changes documented behavior, or before publishing docs. Use when the user says 'review the docs', 'is this documentation accurate', 'update the docs', 'write a README', 'document this API', 'add a docstring', or 'add a changelog entry'. Core job: verify every referenced function, flag, endpoint, config key, and code sample against the source; catch docs-vs-code drift; strip filler and unverifiable claims. DO NOT USE for production code review (use clean-code-guard), test review (use test-guard), marketing copy or blog posts, prose style editing of non-technical writing, or documentation site theming.
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 writing the response to an American Educational Research Journal (AERJ) revise-and-resubmit. AERJ R&Rs come back through the handling editor and multiple masked reviewers, so the response must convert each reviewer while keeping the editor confident the revision is convergent. Structures the response letter; it does not fabricate new results.
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 drafting AISTATS author responses or author-reviewer discussion replies under OpenReview, covering text-only discussion, no-link guidance, no revised-paper upload, anonymity requirements, statistician-reviewer pushback patterns, and decision-focused clarification strategy for theory-plus-experiments papers.
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 writing the response to an American Anthropologist (AA) revise-and-resubmit. AA uses anonymous peer review under an ethics of care, often with cross-subfield reviewers, so the response must convert each reviewer while keeping the editor confident and the ethnographic contribution intact. Structures the response letter; it does not fabricate new 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。
Use when targeting Annual Review of Plant Biology or deciding whether a plant-biology review proposal fits this invited-review venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the authoritative-synthesis and invited-article bar, evidence and balance expectations, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject 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。
Use when targeting the Annual Review of Environment and Resources or deciding whether an environment-and-resources synthesis fits this invited-review venue. Encodes the journal's invited-review fit, the authoritative-synthesis bar, structure expectations, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject 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。
Use when drafting an AAMAS rebuttal to preliminary OpenReview reviews, covering the double-blind constraint, the no-new-results and no-revised-paper norms, how to answer game-theory, MARL, and systems reviewers at once, and how to give the area chair a clean acceptance rationale within a short response window.
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 explaining or planning around AAAI's two-phase review process, Phase 1 rejection risk, Phase 2 additional reviews, AI-assisted review pilot, author feedback, SPC/AC discussion, and final 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。
Use when working with the Associate Editor and Editor of an Academy of Management Annals (Annals) review — scope alignment after a proposal is invited, what review-article referees evaluate, and revision expectations. Plans the interaction; it does not run the portal preflight (amann-submission) or draft the response letter (amann-revision).
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 planning around the two-step proposal→invited-review process of the Academy of Management Annals (Annals) — the twice-yearly proposal cadence, double-blind proposal review, the editor-only full-review development, and timelines. Explains the process; it does not write the proposal (amann-proposal-framing) or run the portal preflight (amann-submission).
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。
Scrape product reviews from G2, Capterra, and Trustpilot using Apify. Single script with platform dispatch. Use when you need to monitor competitor reviews, track product sentiment, or gather customer feedback from review sites.
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。
Scrape product reviews from G2, Capterra, and Trustpilot using Apify. Single script with platform dispatch. Use when you need to monitor competitor reviews, track product sentiment, or gather customer feedback from review sites.
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。
Capture and review Agent Skill observations, and create, run, diagnose, or iteratively improve Skill evaluations (evals) with the skill-up CLI. Use when the user asks to record explicitly attributed Skill usage or feedback; review observations or user-supplied traces/transcripts; turn an approved observation into a regression case; evaluate, test, regress, verify, fix, improve, iterate, or evolve a Skill; add or strengthen eval cases; write eval.yaml/case.yaml; run skill-up run/validate/list-cases/report/import/init; or migrate from Anthropic evals.json. Plugin observation capture/review require either the Codex skill-up plugin or an observer-enabled DSH skill-up plugin. User-supplied external evidence can be reviewed without a plugin; evaluation remains multi-engine.
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。