685 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Gauntlet for absolute claims (always/never/guaranteed/optimal); pressure-test, then refine with explicit boundaries. Use when users ask to prove or disprove strong certainty claims, request devil's-advocate challenge rounds, or want the /tw-prove-it gauntlet to run all 10 rounds continuously by default.
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。
Builds an evidence map for one document, section or contested claim: every factual claim extracted verbatim and numbered, its supporting passage in the supplied sources or UNKNOWN, the strength of that support as evidenced, contradictions between sources, and the specific question or document that would close each gap, returned in the chat as Markdown tables for the author or reviewer. Use when the user asks to "check what this document actually proves", "map the evidence behind these claims", "which of these statements are supported", "build an evidence map", "what would we need to back this up" or "is this claim substantiated". Do not use for requesting evidence of security controls from control owners, use control-evidence-request-pack instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs 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。
Turns a control list and an audit scope into draft evidence requests grouped by control owner, each with the control as stated, the audit period, evidence examples (commonly requested) and a proposed due date derived from the fieldwork dates. Never judges whether evidence is sufficient, never selects the sample and never sends a request; the auditor decides. Use when the user asks to "prepare the evidence requests", "draft the PBC list", "build the evidence request pack for the audit" or "what do we need to ask each control owner for". Do not use for document requests and interview questions built from an audit plan, use audit-prep-pack instead; to check claims in a report against sources, use claims-evidence-map. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs 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。
Turns a set of questions (form exports, helpdesk logs, meeting Q and A, chat threads, a plain list) plus the source documents the user supplies into a DRAFT FAQ grouped by theme: every answer quoted or paraphrased from a named source with a reference, verbatim quotes for dates, figures, eligibility and obligations, UNKNOWN where the sources are silent, a source register with precedence, a conflicts table and a routing list of unanswered questions to owners. Use when the user asks to "build an FAQ from these documents", "answer these questions from the policy", "turn the Q and A into an FAQ page", "group these questions and answer them from the guide" or "what do our documents say about these questions". Do not use for the manager FAQ of a changed HR policy, use policy-change-briefing instead; for checking whether a document's own claims are evidenced, use claims-evidence-map. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs 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。
Builds one DRAFT message house for a product, service, programme or initiative from the source material the user provides: an umbrella statement, two to four pillars and graded proof points under each, with every proof point that lacks a source flagged, a claim sensitivity table, an audience coverage check and open questions. Use when the user asks to "build a message house", "write our messaging framework", "what are the key messages for this launch", "turn this research into messaging pillars" or "test our current messaging against the evidence". Do not use for a campaign one-pager, use campaign-brief-builder instead; to check whether a written document's claims are substantiated, use claims-evidence-map. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs 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。
Drafts one anonymised DRAFT case study (situation, approach, outcome as evidenced, optional lessons) from engagement notes, status reports, closing reports, emails and metrics extracts the user supplies, with a fact trace to the notes, an evidence grade on every result, quotes only where the user supplied them with speaker role and permission, an anonymisation log and a confidentiality checklist that must be completed before publication. Use when the user asks to "write a case study from these notes", "turn this engagement into a customer story", "draft a success story for the website", "anonymise this project write-up" or "prepare a reference case for the proposal". Do not use for redacting identifiers from an existing document, use document-deidentification-pass instead; for checking whether a document's claims are substantiated, use claims-evidence-map. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs 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。
Use when the user asks to "build a story bank", "collect our origin and customer stories", or "assemble reusable proof stories for the message"; assembles reusable narrative units — origin, founder, customer, transformation, and proof stories — each tagged to a claims-ledger ID and a message-house pillar, with every proof labeled Measured / User-provided / [needs source]. Not for authoring the message house or pillars — use message-system-architect; not for brand voice or naming rules — use brand-language-codifier; not for finished long-form prose — use content-writer; not for adjudicating whether a proof is true — use offer-claims-registry. 品牌故事库/起源客户转化/证据故事单元
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 the user asks to "build our pitch deck narrative", "write a fundraising story", or "structure the sales pitch narrative"; derives from the narrative canon a company pitch/deck narrative — problem → the undeniable shift → product-as-hero → proof → the ask — as a slide-beat outline (one narrative beat per slide, with the claim ID each proof beat rests on), for both a sales pitch and a fundraising deck. Every proof beat is labeled Measured / User-provided / '[needs source]' and unverified ones route to the claims candidates. Not for the launch-window battle cards and talk track — use sales-enablement-kit; not for the durable message hierarchy or the arc itself — use message-system-architect / strategic-narrative-designer; not for finished deck visual design — out of scope; not for claim adjudication — use offer-claims-registry. 路演叙事/融资故事/销售 pitch/幻灯节拍
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 the user asks to "plan launch pricing", "design pricing tiers / packaging", or "set up a launch discount / early-bird offer"; produces a launch pricing and packaging plan — tier structure and naming, a value-to-price map aligned to the message house, a launch-offer ladder with a true deadline reason, beta / early-adopter pricing with a post-launch graduation path, and guarantee / refund terms — with every price claim and offer term submitted to memory/events/claims.ndjson. Not for the canonical offer / claim record — use offer-claims-registry; not for paid-newsletter subscription economics — use newsletter-monetization-planner; not for ad bidding — use bid-strategy-planner. 发布定价/梯度打包/早鸟优惠/保证设计
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 the user asks to "register this claim", "log our current offers", or "where is the proof for this figure"; curates claim wording, evidence, disclosures, terms, review dates, and live offers through the append-only claims event stream. Not for scoring claim vetoes — use the relevant auditor; not for writing ad copy — use ad-creative-builder. 广告声明台账/优惠信息登记/证据溯源
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 the user asks to "measure how our narrative is landing", "track echo rate against our canon lexicon", or "check how AI answer engines describe our brand"; produces a resonance report — echo rate (overlap of market language with the narrative-registry canon lexicon, method declared), AI-answer perception via tavily.py --answer (proxy-labeled), share-of-voice on a locked competitor panel (reusing share-of-voice-tracker), and resonance signals from bluesky.py / gdelt.py / pageviews.py — every number labeled Measured / proxy / User-provided, feeding the TALE E dimension and the upstream of the E1 evidence-integrity veto. Not for rebuilding share-of-voice machinery — use share-of-voice-tracker; not for own-site GA4/GSC analytics — use performance-monitor; not for scoring TALE profile result — use narrative-quality-auditor; not for adjudicating claims — use offer-claims-registry. 回声率/AI回答感知/份额之声/共鸣信号
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。
Validate Claude Ads contracts, scoring inputs, run bundles, capabilities, source freshness, safety, installation, uninstall, or release readiness. Use for ads validate, ads status, ads next, stale claims with missing tool access, maturity checks, ownership-manifest uninstall, preserving unrelated ads-* skills, checksum verification, preflight, QA, or release audits. Missing access must demote stale evidence for the run and block dependent release-current claims before recovery guidance.
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 about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing — requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims. Evidence before claims, always.
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。
[32] ANALYZE. Ensure every critical claim has verifiable evidence with confidence levels. Each fact must have source + confidence percentage. If confidence <85%, enter Loop150 to find more sources. Use for critical decisions, factual claims, legal/compliance work, or any situation where unverified claims are dangerous.
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 this skill when the user asks about accident claims management — first-notice-of-loss procedures, working with insurance adjusters, claim severity classification, subrogation, claim closure timelines, and how to influence claim outcomes. Different from accident-investigation-playbook (which covers facts); this covers the insurance + claim side.
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。
[32] ANALYZE. Ensure every critical claim has verifiable evidence with confidence levels. Each fact must have source + confidence percentage. If confidence <85%, enter Loop150 to find more sources. Use for critical decisions, factual claims, legal/compliance work, or any situation where unverified claims are dangerous.
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。
Codified expertise for returns authorization, receipt and inspection, disposition decisions, refund processing, fraud detection, and warranty claims management. Informed by returns operations managers with 15+ years experience. Includes grading frameworks, disposition economics, fraud pattern recognition, and vendor recovery processes. Use when handling product returns, reverse logistics, refund decisions, return fraud detection, or warranty 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。
Codified expertise for handling freight exceptions, shipment delays, damages, losses, and carrier disputes. Informed by logistics professionals with 15+ years operational experience. Includes escalation protocols, carrier-specific behaviors, claims procedures, and judgment frameworks. Use when handling shipping exceptions, freight claims, delivery issues, or carrier disputes.
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。
作業完了や不具合修正を報告する前に、テストやビルドを実行して結果を確認します。コミットやPR作成の前にも、実際の出力を根拠に状況を伝えるスキルです。
メモや調査資料をもとに、ブログ記事、ガイド、ニュースレターなどの長文を作成し、既存の文体やブランドの方針に合わせて構成と根拠を整えるスキル。
論文や研究計画を共通の評価基準で読み、研究方法、根拠、引用、文章構成を点検するスキル。評価の理由と修正の優先順位、次に直す内容を整理します。
複数工程の計画書を読み、各工程に合うECCコマンドを貼り付け用に生成します。工程の識別情報や完了条件を含め、対象範囲を渡せないコマンドは保留として示します。
学術・技術文献を検索し、選定基準に沿って比較・統合するスキルです。検索履歴や除外理由を残し、根拠の強さと引用を確認したレビューにまとめます。
製品や新機能の発売に向け、顧客・競合調査から訴求方針、LP、メール、SNS、広告、短尺動画の原稿と投稿予定を組み立てるスキル。媒体間の表現や主張も点検します。