「completeness」の検索結果

Validate CLAUDE.md structure and completeness

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。

Validates documentation completeness for prior authorization requests by checking a 10-item checklist covering patient information, provider credentials, insurance details, medical codes, clinical notes quality, NCCI bundling risk, and service type classification.

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。

Validates and summarizes the four required authorization forms in a personal injury matter (retainer, HIPAA release, insurance authorization, employment record release). Confirms signatures, dates, scope, and completeness to determine readiness for the investigation phase. Use when reviewing client onboarding packets, verifying authorization forms before discovery, or checking HIPAA and record-release compliance.

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 existing API documentation for completeness, accuracy, and developer experience. Use when asked to "audit our API docs", "are our docs accurate", or "review documentation quality".

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。

First-order logic with quantifiers, predicates, functions, and identity. Covers syntax, interpretation over a domain, the universal and existential quantifiers, quantifier scope and binding, translation from natural language with multi-variable predicates, natural deduction for quantifiers, undecidability at first order, and the soundness/completeness theorems. Use when propositional logic is insufficient -- whenever "for all" or "there exists" matters to the argument.

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。

用户写完推文初稿、准备发布前做完备性自检时;或纠结"这条推文发出去会有人收藏吗 / 值得收藏吗"时;或感觉初稿"差点什么"但说不清缺什么时。关键 trigger: 检查推文还缺什么 / 五件套 / 完备性检查 / 收藏理由 / 证据够不够 / 三个可 / checklist / is this tweet complete / worth saving。不适用于:还没写初稿时(先用起草工具);评估值不值得发(那是四省模型)。本 skill 把推文当小型信息产品逐件自检五要素:价值承诺 / 使用场景 / 低门槛入口 / 证据(三个可:可见可点可算)/ 收藏理由,缺任一件读者在该环节流失。

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。

This skill should be used when agents generate placeholder tokens like "pseudo-", "mock-", "temporary", "TODO", "demo-", or similar incompleteness markers. Detects substitution patterns in agent OUTPUT and triggers mandatory user interview instead of accepting incomplete work. Activates automatically on any output containing forbidden tokens.

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。

Evaluate and iterate on the SDLC Layer Separation Architecture implementation. Runs validation checks (cross-references, doc completeness, layer metadata, integration points), produces a findings report, and supports iterative fixes. Use when validating first-pass implementation, before claiming layer work is complete, or when improving layer docs/schema.

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 and iterate on the SDLC Layer Separation Architecture implementation across the check categories defined in its Evaluation Checklist — cross-references, doc completeness, knowledge-explorer layer filters, research entry metadata, integration points, and plan consistency. Produces a structured findings report and optionally applies safe fixes. Use when validating a first-pass implementation, before claiming layer work complete, auditing layer docs or schema, or running --dry-run to preview findings without 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。

Operates or audits a live Qualtrics survey through the v3 APIs without disrupting fielding. Covers publish gating, quotas, flow routing, embedded data, panel-vendor redirects, read-back verification, and a read-only pre-fielding audit. Use when publishing or patching a fielding instrument, when a quota counts without blocking, when configuring panel-vendor redirects or flow gates, or when auditing a survey before launch for consent gates, force-response completeness, quotas and redirects, anti-bot instrumentation, and language-arm symmetry.

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 verifying information (fact, number, quote, event, statement) against authoritative primary sources, or cross-checking a number via one-level metric decomposition (Z = P × Q). Triggers: "verify X", "is this true", "find the original source", "where is this number from", "two sources disagree", "is it true X never did Y". Covers five scenarios: (1) basic truthfulness check, (2) completeness / out-of-context quoting, (3) one-level reasoning verification, (4) negative-statement handling, (5) multi-source conflict side-by-side output. Dig into whitelisted primary sources only (user-supplied files, official websites & databases, authoritative industry sources); cited reports / charts / datasets must be downloaded and read locally to count as verified — if download is blocked, hand the link to the user. If nothing can be found, plainly state "cannot verify" rather than guessing, patching, or citing secondary paraphrases. Always reply in the user's question language.

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。

Perform a thorough, Incan-project-aware code review. Use when the user asks for a review, code critique, PR review, or says /review. Checks Rust anti-patterns, compiler pipeline completeness, error handling, test coverage, style conventions, and RFC compliance specific to the Incan compiler codebase.

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 change against issue, RFC, branch, and user-request scope. Use when a broad review needs a dedicated scope/completeness pass or when the user asks whether the implementation actually matches the intended surface.

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。

Synthesizes exploration findings into unified analysis with deep investigation capabilities (shell commands, git history, dependency analysis) and completeness evaluation (converted from agent)

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。

Synthesizes exploration findings into unified analysis with deep investigation capabilities and completeness evaluation (converted from agent)

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。

QA validation and fix loop workflow — validates implementation completeness then iterates fix cycles until all acceptance criteria pass and quality gates clear

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 structured plans from requirements. Generates comprehensive plans with steps, dependencies, risks, and success criteria. Coordinates with specialist agents for planning input and validates plan completeness. Uses template-renderer for formatted output.

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。

Verifies implementation plan quality across 8 dimensions (requirement-coverage, task-completeness, dependency-validity, scope-sanity, artifact-wiring, risk-assessment, testability, estimation-quality) and returns pass/fail with per-dimension scores.

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。

Gate for HIGH/EPIC tasks that validates plan completeness and architecture compliance before implementation begins

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。

LLM-as-judge evaluation framework with 5-dimension rubric (accuracy, groundedness, coherence, completeness, helpfulness) for scoring AI-generated content quality with weighted composite scores and evidence citations

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。

Expert PE review of a submittal (shop drawings, product data, samples, equipment brochures) against specs, drawings, code questions and trade coordination. Produces findings with both sources, trade routing and a completeness gate. Triggers: 'review submittal', 'review shop drawings'.

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。

Count-based quantity takeoff and tag completeness auditing for construction drawings. Vision + OCR reconciliation, sheet markup, Excel QTO output. Triggers: 'tag audit', 'quantity takeoff', 'QTO', 'count fixtures'.

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 web pages to clean markdown using Firecrawl v2 — handles JS-heavy pages, site crawls, URL mapping, document parsing (PDF/DOCX/XLSX), LLM-powered extraction, autonomous agent scraping, and post-scrape browser interaction (Interact API). Free keyless mode available for search/scrape/parse/interact (no API key needed). Prefer over WebFetch for quality and completeness. Triggers on scrape URL, fetch page, crawl site, extract content, parse document, web to markdown, DeepWiki, Firecrawl.

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 recent high-relevance papers from a target venue to identify claim-relevant experimental evidence gaps after core P0 results exist. Use for venue completeness and reviewer-risk analysis; not for redefining the research question or running experiments.

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。