2,290 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Create or review audit support deliverables with traceable assumptions, decision criteria, ownership, and risk controls. Use when the user asks for audit support planning or analysis.
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。
Create or review close management deliverables with traceable assumptions, decision criteria, ownership, and risk controls. Use when the user asks for close management planning or analysis.
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。
Create a 30/60/90-day cash-flow forecast from AR, AP, opening cash, payment timing, and fixed-cost data. Use when asked about runway, payroll coverage, liquidity risks, or a near-term cash crunch.
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。
End-to-end clinical trial analysis workflow from CDISC SDTM/ADaM loading through ICH E9(R1) estimand-driven primary analysis to CONSORT 2025 regulatory-compliant reporting. Covers data preparation, FDA 2023 marginal vs conditional logistic regression, categorical tests with Boschloo, modern HTE/subgroup methods, missing-data sensitivity (MMRM, reference-based MI, Permutt tipping point), graphical multiplicity (Bretz-Maurer), survival analysis (Cox/RMST/competing risks) when applicable, and Table 1. Use when performing a complete analysis of clinical trial data.
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。
End-to-end post-GWAS causal inference pipeline orchestrating heritability partitioning, genetic correlation, Mendelian randomization with CHP-aware sensitivity (CAUSE / LHC-MR), colocalization, fine-mapping with SuSiE / FOCUS, mediation, TWAS triangulation, cis-pQTL drug-target MR, effector-gene prioritization (L2G / PoPS / cS2G), and GenomicSEM common-factor GWAS. Use when triangulating causal inference across multiple complementary methods, prioritizing tissues via stratified LDSC, nominating or de-risking drug targets, mapping a lead SNP to a candidate effector gene, modeling shared genetic architecture across correlated traits, or producing a STROBE-MR-compliant publication-grade evidence battery from GWAS summary statistics.
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。
Performs time-to-event analysis for clinical trials including Cox proportional hazards regression with PH diagnostics, restricted mean survival time (RMST) under non-PH, competing risks via Fine-Gray vs cause-specific Cox, weighted log-rank and MaxCombo for non-proportional hazards, recurrent events (Andersen-Gill, PWP, WLW), and interval-censored data. Use when analyzing time-to-event endpoints (OS, PFS, DOR, TTR, TTNT) in oncology or other clinical trials.
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。
Cross-agent self-inspection of your AI-agent stack. Audits skills, MCP servers, hooks, plugins, commands, credentials, and memory files across Claude Code, Codex, OpenClaw, and NanoClaw. Produces a structured inventory and narrative briefing with cross-ecosystem risk analysis. Use when the user asks to audit their own setup, check what they have installed, review their agent stack security posture, or understand cross-tool interactions. Use when a user has accumulated skills/plugins/MCP servers over time and wants visibility into their attack surface. Use after installing new skills or plugins. Do NOT use for vetting external code before install (that is repo-forensics). Do NOT use for incident response during active attacks. Do NOT use for fixing or patching vulnerabilities (forensify is read-only).
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。
Safe refactoring workflow using trace-mcp — assess risk, find candidates, check impact, and rename symbols across all files without missing import sites or cross-file references.
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 Java code for bugs, duplicate code, correctness risks, maintainability improvements, and missing tests. By default review files modified in git; when the user explicitly names files, classes, packages, or a diff, review that scope instead. Generate a detailed review.md report with actionable comments 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。
Fix-and-Flip Analysis — purchase price, ARV, rehab budget breakdown, holding costs, selling costs, profit margin, ROI, timeline, and risk assessment with Flip Score (0-100)
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。
Neighborhood Analysis — schools, crime, walkability, demographics, amenities, growth trajectory, and natural disaster risk with Neighborhood Score (0-100)
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 AI to write NEW test code from specs, PRDs, user stories, code diffs, bug reports, or OpenAPI specs. Staged pipeline: requirements extraction → risk analysis → coverage matrix → scenario generation → oracle design → test code → human review, with guardrails against hallucinated APIs and weak assertions. Use when: "generate tests from spec," "tests from PRD," "tests from user story," "auto-generate test cases," "AI write tests for me." Not for: testing AI/LLM features in your product — use ai-system-testing. Not for: auditing a pre-existing test suite you did not just generate — use ai-qa-review (Step 7 here only reviews tests THIS pipeline produced). Related: playwright-automation, unit-testing, api-testing, qa-project-context.
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。
Design and execute structured exploratory testing sessions. Covers Session-Based Test Management (SBTM), charter writing, heuristic-based exploration (HICCUPS, FEW HICCUPS), bug discovery patterns, note-taking templates, and conversion of findings to automated tests. Use when: "exploratory testing," "SBTM," "manual testing," "bug hunting," "test charter," "heuristic testing." Not for: an AI browser agent autonomously exploring the app from a natural-language goal — use agentic-browser-testing. Not for: testing your product's own AI/LLM features — use ai-system-testing. Related: test-planning, ai-bug-triage, risk-based-testing, agentic-browser-testing.
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。
Measure and improve test coverage meaningfully. Covers Istanbul/V8/coverage.py configuration, coverage gap analysis by risk, coverage-as-ratchet in CI (never let it decrease), PR coverage diff checks, mutation testing for assertion quality, and distinguishing meaningful from vanity coverage. Use when: "code coverage," "coverage gap," "Istanbul," "coverage threshold," "coverage report," "branch coverage." Not for: writing the tests that raise coverage — use unit-testing; coverage as a tracked KPI trend over time — use qa-metrics. Related: unit-testing, ci-cd-integration, qa-metrics, ai-qa-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。
Test AI/LLM features that ship in your product. Covers prompt regression testing, response quality evaluation, tool-call validation, hallucination and RAG grounding checks, nondeterministic-output strategies, red-team/safety scans, eval frameworks, and agent-as-target injection (indirect injection via tool output / RAG / scan reports, self-propagating payloads, data exfiltration via an agent) plus a bundled detector for untrusted content. Use when: "test our LLM feature," "prompt regression test," "eval framework," "hallucination test," "RAG grounding," "nondeterministic output," "AI feature testing," "red-team our chatbot," "indirect prompt injection," "agent reading untrusted tool output," "production AI quality." Not for: using AI to generate your own test code — use ai-test-generation. Not for: classifying CI failures with AI — use ai-bug-triage. Not for: EU AI Act / GDPR conformity of an AI feature — use compliance-testing. Not for: canary/flag rollout of an AI feature — use testing-in-production. Related: ai-test-generation, ai-qa-review, api-testing, compliance-testing, security-testing, risk-based-testing, test-data-management.
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 technology decisions for every product capability by discovering existing assets, evaluating vendor-aligned options, and categorizing as Reuse/Extend/Build/Buy/Integrate/Research during PRD v0.5 Red Team Review. Handles both greenfield and brownfield contexts. Triggers on "tech stack", "build or buy?", "what technologies?", "technical decisions", "what do we reuse?", "existing stack", "vendor constraint", "IBM-first", "what tools do we need?", "evaluate solutions", "select tech stack". Consumes FEA- (features), SCR- (screens), RISK- (constraints). Outputs TECH- entries with decisions, rationale, and cross-references. Feeds v0.6 Architecture Design.
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。
Determine technologies needed to build the product, making build/buy/integrate decisions during PRD v0.5 Red Team Review. Handles both greenfield and brownfield contexts. Triggers on requests to select tech stack, evaluate technologies, make build vs. buy decisions, discover existing assets, or when user asks "what technologies?", "select tech stack", "build or buy?", "what do we reuse?", "existing stack", "technical decisions", "what tools do we need?", "evaluate solutions". Consumes FEA- (features), SCR- (screens), RISK- (constraints). Outputs TECH- entries with decisions, rationale, and trade-offs. Feeds v0.6 Architecture Design.
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。
Define how system components connect, establishing boundaries, patterns, and integration approaches during PRD v0.6 Architecture. Triggers on requests to design architecture, create system design, define component relationships, or when user asks "design architecture", "system design", "how do components connect?", "architecture decisions", "technical architecture", "system overview". Consumes TECH- (stack selections), RISK- (constraints), FEA- (features). Outputs ARC- entries documenting architecture decisions with rationale. Feeds v0.6 Technical Specification.
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。
Take a plan all the way to a ready-to-merge pull request — review the plan (scaled to risk), implement it test-first, code-review and fix, run the CI gate, open the PR, and watch it green. Use after you have an approved plan (from plan mode, or the Plan agent); pass `issue <n>` to deliver a specific GitHub issue you name, or `next` to take the top startable issue off the project board's Ready column — either way it re-verifies, claims and plans the issue first. Invoking it with a plan already in hand is itself plan approval — it then runs autonomously to a single hard stop: ready-to-merge.
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。
E2B is a cloud platform that gives AI agents secure, isolated sandboxes — ephemeral Linux VMs with a filesystem, package managers, and internet access — to run AI-generated code safely. Use when a user wants an agent to execute Python or JavaScript, install packages, read/write files, or run a long process without risking the host machine, or wants to wire code execution into a LangChain, CrewAI, or custom agent 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。
Comprehensive expertise in decentralized perpetual futures protocols, including GMX, dYdX, Hyperliquid, and similar platforms. Covers funding rate mechanics, liquidation engines, position management, oracle integration, and protocol risk management. Use when "perpetual futures, perps, funding rate, liquidation, GMX, dYdX, Hyperliquid, leverage trading, margin trading, long position, short position, mark price, index price, open interest, basis trading, " mentioned.
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。
The foundational theory of interactive experience design - loops, motivation, feel, and the art of meaningful playUse when "game design, core loop, game feel, player motivation, game mechanics, meaningful choice, progression system, game economy, game balance, playtesting, GDD, game document, fun factor, engagement, flow state, risk reward, player agency, juice, game polish, 8 kinds of fun, bartle types, MDA framework, game-design, player-experience, core-loop, motivation, game-feel, MDA, playtesting, GDD, systems-thinking, player-psychology, engagement, flow-state" mentioned.
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。
Technical decision-making frameworks - trade-off evaluation, reversibility analysis, and second-order thinking for better engineering choicesUse when "should we, which is better, trade-off, decision, choose between, versus, pros and cons, what if we, is it worth, evaluate options, decisions, trade-offs, architecture, adr, reversibility, strategy, planning, risk" mentioned.
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。
Accessibility isn't a feature - it's a fundamental quality of good software. 1 in 4 adults has a disability. Many more have temporary impairments or situational limitations. Your users include people who can't see, can't hear, can't use a mouse, or can't process information the way you do. This skill covers WCAG guidelines, ARIA patterns, keyboard navigation, screen reader compatibility, and automated testing. Key insight: accessible code is better code. The constraints of accessibility lead to simpler, more semantic, more maintainable implementations. 2025 lesson: Accessibility lawsuits are at an all-time high. "We'll add it later" is both ethically wrong and legally risky. Start accessible, stay accessible. Use when "accessibility, a11y, wcag, aria, screen reader, keyboard navigation, focus trap, alt text, color contrast, skip link, accessible, accessibility, a11y, wcag, aria, screen-reader, keyboard, inclusive, semantic-html" mentioned.
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。