「independent review」の検索結果

Design or review a declared control-command profile and its verb/backend lifecycle matrix. Distinguish policy denial, unsupported capability, delivery acknowledgement, independently observed effect, and unknown outcome; bind authorization to principal, target, scope, current policy, expiry, and fencing epoch. NOT for claiming runtime correctness, proving an adapter from declarations, or approving a control-panel button without independent runtime 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。

利用できる専門エージェントを分野別に一覧にし、最大5つを選んで同じ課題に並行で取り組ませ、意見の一致点や相違点、次の対応を一つの報告にまとめるスキル。

• 利用できる専門エージェントの確認
• 異なる分野から依頼先を選びたいとき
• 公開前のサイトを安全性とSEOで確認

Use when a startup is approached by a prospective partner and someone has to decide should we sign this partner, at what partner tier (referral / reseller / OEM / SI-consulting / strategic alliance), with what joint GTM commitment, and at what revshare. Classifies partner tier from independent-demand evidence vs. preferential-terms hunting, designs a 90-day joint GTM plan, models revshare against direct-sale margin, and surfaces kill criteria for unwinding under-performing partnerships. For Head of Partnerships, Head of BD, and Founder-CEOs doing reseller agreement, OEM deal, or strategic alliance review — not technical sale enablement, not channel cost economics, not M&A.

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。

/cs:cross-eval <memo> — Multi-model consensus on a board memo or strategy brief. Claude + Codex + Gemini cross-review with graceful degradation. Use when a high-stakes memo needs an independent sanity check before the boardroom — e.g. a bet-the-company pivot or fundraise terms.

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。

Multi-agent board meeting protocol for strategic decisions. Runs a structured 6-phase deliberation: context loading, independent C-suite contributions (isolated, no cross-pollination), critic analysis, synthesis, founder review, and decision extraction. Use when the user invokes /cs:boardroom, calls a board meeting, or wants structured multi-perspective executive deliberation on a strategic 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。

Drive Anthropic's Claude Code CLI (`claude -p`) as a non-interactive coding sub-agent from inside Codex. Use when you want to delegate a coding/analysis/refactor task to Claude, get a second opinion / adversarial review from another model, hand off long-context planning, or fan out parallel agents. Covers the exact `claude -p` flags, permission modes, output capture, JSON/stream-json modes, session resume, parallel fan-out, and the mandatory "delegate → capture → independently verify, never trust the self-report" supervision loop.

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。

Drive OpenAI's Codex CLI (`codex exec`) as a non-interactive coding sub-agent from inside Claude Code. Load WHENEVER you want to delegate a coding/analysis/refactor task to Codex, get a second opinion / adversarial review from another model, fan out parallel agents across files or worktrees, or run a long mechanical job while you stay the planner. Covers the exact `codex exec` flags, sandbox tiers, output capture, JSON/schema modes, session resume, parallel fan-out, and the mandatory "delegate → capture → independently verify, never trust the self-report" supervision loop.

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。

Make a PR, wait for CI with bounded transport retries, independently review, and merge only when all gates pass.

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。

Independent checker for release note drafts. Reviews accuracy against the changelog-scan data, tone, completeness, and flags breaking/security items. Use after draft-release-notes. Never let the drafter verify itself.

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。

Run independent subtasks in parallel — one git worktree and one implementation sub-agent per task, each opening its own PR — then cross-review every PR. polly never merges; the human does.

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。

Verify an implementer's diff with an INDEPENDENT, different-vendor sub-agent (diff plus contract only); turn blocking issues into fix-tasks and loop until clean.

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。

Split one oversized commit or branch into a stack of independently reviewable Graphite (gt) PRs - deciding what genuinely separates, what is atomic and must stay whole, and proving each lower PR builds and passes without the ones above it. Use when asked to "split this PR", "this commit is too big", "break this into a stack", "can we separate this out", or when a diff bundles several concerns across different layers.

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。

Spec-driven feature work that freezes obligations instead of the plan: one human-reviewed plan with EARS criteria, path, entities, interface and one-way doors, then proof-backed checks, then build, then an independent Verifier. Use when the user says "tlc-spec-lean", "plan feature", "specify feature", "write the checks", "build this plan", or "verify work". Do NOT use for standalone design documents unattached to a feature, architecture decomposition analysis, or work that already has a task list or checklist to execute.

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。

Apply a prompt-agnostic execution and verification loop to any substantial task while preserving the original request. Use when the user asks to fan out work, use subagents or independent reviewers, loop until done, benchmark against references, apply a harsh critic, compare candidates blind, improve an existing prompt with verification, or continue until explicit quality gates pass.

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。

Convert an article, tutorial, or prompt pack into focused reusable AgentSkills, one independent capability per skill, with portable instructions, example prompts, working demos, preview screenshots, validation, gallery updates, and a narrow commit. Use when the user asks to turn an article's prompts, tutorial sections, design patterns, interactions, or workflow ideas into complete skills rather than leaving them as prose.

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。

Darwin Skill 2.0 (达尔文.skill 2.0): autonomous skill optimizer, v2.0 integrates Microsoft Research SkillLens (arXiv 2605.23899) 9-dim rubric + SkillOpt (arXiv 2605.23904) validation-gated design + human-in-the-loop checkpoints. Evaluates SKILL.md files using a 9-dimension rubric (structure + effectiveness + meta-skill blacklists), runs hill-climbing with git version control, spawns independent judge agents for blind evaluation, validates improvements through test prompts with auto-break on diminishing returns, and generates visual result cards. Use when user mentions "优化skill", "skill评分", "自动优化", "auto optimize", "skill质量检查", "达尔文", "darwin", "帮我改改skill", "skill怎么样", "提升skill质量", "skill review", "skill打分".

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 asked to watch, babysit, audit, review, compare, or fix another agent's work from a Codex session ID, Claude Code session/transcript, chat/thread link, PR, branch, log, or pasted run summary. Monitor until the other agent is done or blocked, reconstruct what the user asked, independently investigate the same problem to form your own hypotheses and approach, inspect what the agent actually changed and verified, compare the two investigations, report gaps and add-on directions, and optionally make scoped fixes when the user authorizes repair.

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。

Direct-invocation specialist for clear, self-contained HTML plans that preserve source material while improving hierarchy, sequence, ownership, dependencies, and reviewability. Use when the user explicitly invokes html-plan or the broad html skill routes a plan request here. Do not activate independently from a general request.

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。

Provider-agnostic multi-LLM deliberation. Three phases — independent responses, cross-model anonymized ranking, chairman synthesis. Credentials come from explicit plugin configuration or pro-workflow-specific CLI variables. Persists transcript to a wiki page when --wiki <slug> is passed. Use when the user wants multiple AI perspectives, consensus-building, or the "LLM Council" approach for high-stakes reviews, plan critique, or contested learning rules.

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。

Org-grade attack-surface mapping: given a company's legal identity, discover its ENTIRE owned internet footprint — corporate family -> owned domains -> owned netblocks/ASN -> live assets — with attribution discipline, not just DNS breadth. The org-first attribution pyramid (legal entity -> LEI/registration -> corporate family -> owned domains -> owned netblocks/ASN -> live assets). Corporate-identity resolution via the GLEIF LEI API (legal name -> LEI, exact-LEI direct-children expansion, downward-only depth-capped BFS, NEVER a name re-resolution), SEC-EDGAR full-text search + Exhibit-21 subsidiary entity names, OpenCorporates entity corroboration, Wikidata SPARQL corporate graph (P856/P355/P749/P1830). Domain attribution via reverse-WHOIS (WhoisXML preview-then-purchase quota guard, SecurityTrails associated-domains — both paid), crt.sh O= certificate-transparency organization pivot (keyless), infrastructure correlation (shared NS/MX/SaaS-TXT, netblock membership, reverse-DNS PTR), and the independent-evidence combiner (1-prod(1-w_i), rule of three, OwnerTier NONE/WEAK/MODERATE/STRONG/CONFIRMED) — discover-only `related:` candidates are NEVER auto-scanned. Netblock/ASN attribution via org-first RIR queries (ARIN Whois-RWS org-handle search, RIPE DB organisation + inverse-org search) that recover 'dark netblocks' with no DNS link to the seed, ASN discovery (RIPEstat + BGPView union), the HYPERSCALER-SCOPE GUARD (never attribute a whole AWS/GCP/Azure/Cloudflare announced range to a tenant — keep only the seed-containing block, tag shared_hosting_cdn), and org-identity-seeded internet-scan-index queries (Shodan/Censys/ZoomEye/FOFA/BinaryEdge org: filters + an always-on keyless crt.sh fallback). Promote-to-scan triage ranks forgotten discover-only netblocks by remote-access exposure (gateway-vendor/KEV/control-plane/datastore port scoring) into an operator queue. Attribution confidence rubric + anti-patterns (namesake grafting via GLEIF name re-resolution, single-signal ownership, hyperscaler over-attribution, privacy-WHOIS pivot poisoning, RIR org-name collisions). Passive/keyless-first OSINT only — every paid-key dependency is enrichment on top of a keyless core, never a hard requirement. Use when mapping an organization's full corporate-family internet footprint, resolving a legal entity to its LEI/subsidiaries, discovering domains/netblocks/ASNs an org owns beyond its one seed domain, auditing M&A/shadow-IT sprawl, or scoping an engagement that starts from a company NAME rather than a domain.

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。

Run any question, idea, or decision through a council of 5 AI advisors who independently analyze it, peer-review each other anonymously, and synthesize a final verdict. Based on Karpathy's LLM Council methodology. MANDATORY TRIGGERS: 'council this', 'run the council', 'war room this', 'pressure-test this', 'stress-test this', 'debate this'. STRONG TRIGGERS (use when combined with a real decision or tradeoff): 'should I X or Y', 'which option', 'what would you do', 'is this the right move', 'validate this', 'get multiple perspectives', 'I can't decide', 'I'm torn between'. Do NOT trigger on simple yes/no questions, factual lookups, or casual 'should I' without a meaningful tradeoff (e.g. 'should I use markdown' is not a council question). DO trigger when the user presents a genuine decision with stakes, multiple options, and context that suggests they want it pressure-tested from multiple angles.

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。

Designs orchestrator-and-subagent hierarchies for a repository — splitting agents by exclusive write surface, pairing every producer with an independent auditor, and enforcing the split with a script that runs in CI. Use this whenever the user wants to set up, expand, audit, or fix a multi-agent or subagent structure for a codebase; asks how to divide work between agents; wants agent charters, roles, or a surface map written; or is hitting agents that collide on the same files, review their own work, or drift from their remit. Also use when sizing a roster or deciding whether a new agent is justified.

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。

Execute work units through the rigorous 4-phase Metaswarm cycle (Implement -> Validate -> Adversarial Review -> Commit) with independent quality gate enforcement.

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。