「the」の検索結果

Builds the "Report Sources" child page for a finished Weekly Community Signal report — an evidence-backed defense of WHY every item landed in the column/section/rank it did. The agent argues each placement like a lawyer (claim → evidence → rule → rebuttal) but is under oath: it CANNOT invent, spin, or overstate — every claim ties to a verifiable fact (issue #, label, PR type, quoted comment, npm output, the front-door test). Not CYA — it's so Nathan can defend the report with facts and see the exact reasoning behind each call. Runs after the report (invoked by weekly-report, last steps) and on "report sources", "defend the report", "why is this here".

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。

[Testing] Use when you need to drive an integration-test suite to fully green — each round runs /integration-test-verify (whole system by default, or the target named in the prompt), and on ANY failure combines /debug-investigate + /integration-test-review (report-only) to adjudicate the fault (test wrong · test not optimal · source wrong), then /fix to resolve it at the owning layer, then /changes-review on that round's fix diff, then re-runs a FRESH full verify — looping until the whole suite passes its 2-consecutive-green-runs gate with zero failures.

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。

Before improving anything, show the spread of what can concretely be done on this specific input — a short menu of 3-5 interventions from lightest to heaviest touch, then wait for the user to pick. Domain-agnostic; works on any material the user hands over. Trigger when the user says "spread", "show me my options", "what can you do with this", or asks to improve or fix something without specifying how. Do NOT trigger when the user has already named a specific fix — then just do the fix.

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 building, refactoring, or debugging a macOS menu bar app with SwiftUI, or when a MenuBarExtra misbehaves — the icon renders wrong or vanishes, the Settings window opens behind other apps, the popover cannot be closed, controls inside a .menu style do not render, the Dock icon comes back, or the app quits when the item is dragged off the menu bar. Triggers include menu bar app, status bar app, tray app, MenuBarExtra, NSStatusItem, LSUIElement, hide Dock icon.

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。

INTERNAL/HELPER skill — do NOT invoke directly from a user query. This is the shared formatter/poster used by create-issue, create-issue-from-issue-number, and update-issue. It formats an implementation-ready GitHub Issue body, runs the pre-posting checklist, executes `gh issue create` or `gh issue edit`, and optionally posts a 確認事項 follow-up comment. Invoke this skill ONLY from one of the three parent skills via the Skill tool, after the parent has completed analysis. If a user asks to 'format an issue body' or similar, route them to the appropriate parent skill (/create-issue, /create-issue-from-issue-number, or /update-issue) rather than invoking this one directly.

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。

Build one release phase against the specs — plan it on an interactive board (endpoints, components, resources, with what already exists read from the codebase), let the user adjust, then build node by node while the board shows live progress. Use when the user wants to build a phase, implement the phase-1 slice, execute the plan from a story map or spec, or watch a build happen visually.

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。

Produces a deep, honest peer-review of how someone uses Claude Code by statistically analyzing their local session data (~/.claude/usage-data/ and ~/.claude/projects/). Trigger whenever the user asks to review, analyze, audit, or critique their own Claude Code usage, workflow, habits, or skill level — including phrases like "analyze my cc usage", "review my cc sessions", "peer review my cc workflow", "deeper than /insights", or any ask for an honest audit of their AI workflow. Also covers portfolio/hiring-manager framings (e.g. "portfolio for Anthropic/OpenAI/xAI"), but ALWAYS ask the user in Step 0 which version to build (self / hr / both) before running — never silently produce an HR report, because that version goes to outsiders and needs explicit privacy setup. The HTML report is laid out ledger-first for SELF (opening band, output/team/leak/trend ledgers, then peer review, 9-dim scoring, try-this-week, case study, claim-indexed evidence). The HR variant is a recruiter version v1: identity card, earned badges (threshold-based, earned-only), allowlist-filtered output ledger, one case study, and a methodology & scope disclosure — no scores, no peer-review memo, no charts.

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。

At the close of an epic (or a difficult issue), post a postmortem roundup comment — what went well, what was hard (backed by evidence), and 1–3 concrete proposals to improve the skills/flows — then offer to turn accepted proposals into their own `workflow`-labeled tasks, and end with a `🔭 Next` handoff (a paste-ready next-session prompt + the next epic to start). Use at epic close, after the "verify the whole thing" rollup, or when asked to "do a retro", "postmortem this epic", "what did we learn", "how do we improve the workflow".

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 migration step and the package-owned-table exception — NOT the normal collection flow. For app collections use the crouton CLI/skill (schema JSON → `crouton config`); reach here when you then need to generate/apply the Drizzle migration and hit the schema.mjs-only-after-build gotcha ("No schema files found"), or when adding a package-owned infra table (the crouton-flow pattern) that does NOT go through `crouton config`.

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。

How to MEASURE this repo instead of eyeballing it — interpret the loop-station context-budget trend (history.jsonl, thresholds, the tokenizer-switch gotcha), read a session trace, use the eval ledger (cost-per-success), and pick the right evidence tool (app-shots, smoke-deployed, db-counts, --check modes). Use when asked "is the harness bloating", "how big is CLAUDE.md really", "did this agent run actually succeed", "prove this works", "what evidence do we have", or when tempted to declare a capability (browser, tool) unavailable. For RUNNING the loop-station scripts, defer to the loop-station skill — this skill is interpretation + the wider evidence toolkit.

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。

Strategy map analysis using the Eterdis two-directional causal chain. Use this skill to diagnose whether strategy is coherent by building two chains — bottom-up from resources to results, top-down from expectations to requirements — and finding where they don't connect. Runs in three modes — full diagnostic for deep sessions, review mode for quick re-assessment, and alert triggers for early-warning signals. Updates company-context.md after every run. Triggers on questions about strategic alignment, why the strategy isn't working, what to invest in, how the business creates value, whether the plan is realistic, or where the biggest gap is. Based on practice by Eterdis (eterdis.com).

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。

MUST USE when the user needs current, online, or web-derived information — news, latest releases, vendor docs, real-world examples, recent changes, or anything not in the model's training set. LLM-neutral skill that exposes a unified web search CLI behind a single command. Runs single or multi-provider in parallel, saves raw + normalized JSON to a temp directory, prints the path so callers can pipe through rg / jq / grep. Zero-config out of the box. Works identically on macOS, Linux, WSL, Git Bash for Windows, and any environment with Python 3.8+. Triggers: 'search the web', 'look up online', 'google this', 'find current information', 'latest news', 'recent docs', 'check the internet', 'web search', 'browser search', 'research this', 'what is the latest', 'who is X', 'find examples of', 'is there documentation for', 'how do people solve', 'web-search', 'web_search'.

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。

Recover a fleet whose machines cannot see each other over the file-sync network: establish ground truth at the hub from the live sync API rather than memory or one peer's claim, publish the hub's verified device id over the messaging rail, and walk each disconnected peer through re-pairing. Triggers: "/raise-sync", "sync is down", "machines cannot see each other".

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 the vault data-safety runbook: 3-2-1 backup, the never-deleted originals archive, the schedulers that keep it running, and the restore or new-machine migration procedure. Verifies by reading state rather than trusting exit codes. Triggers: "make a backup", "verify the backup", "the backup looks broken", "restore the vault".

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。

Rebuild the canon mirror for a second coding agent (AGENTS.md) after a rules-file version bump: show the changelog delta, write in only the new rules, then enforce the size cap, version stamp, structural anchors, a copy into the shared folder and the linter run. Triggers: "/codex-mirror", "update the codex mirror", "AGENTS.md is stale".

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。

Author and submit a Narrative workflow from a natural-language intent. Picks the closest example from `assets/examples/`, adapts it to the user's case, walks the YAML against the spec, resolves the data plane, and submits via `narrative_workflows_create` only after the user has approved the rendered spec. Use when: "create a workflow that does X", "schedule a daily refresh of dataset Y", "wrap this NQL as a workflow", "build a pipeline that creates view A then refreshes view B", "submit this workflow YAML", "productionize this query as a recurring job". (narrative-common)

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。

Find the canonical Rosetta Stone attribute that best matches a fuzzy description, semantic phrase, or required schema shape. Searches the catalog with pagination, describes the shortlist in one batched call, ranks candidates by name + shape match, and returns the canonical attribute ID plus close alternatives. Use when: "find the X attribute", "what's the graph-edge attribute ID", "look up the email Rosetta Stone attribute", "search the attribute catalog for Y", "which attribute has SOURCE_ID + TARGET_ID + IS_DIRECTED". (narrative-common)

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。

Choose the design and the numbers a research run can honestly claim — write the structured METHOD RECORD (databases, date of access, search string, criteria, screening counts) that r0 validates, pick the claim strength a design can actually carry, record a statistic as data rather than prose, route to the reporting guideline the design owes, and decide what to preregister. Use when a run's question, design, search or statistics have to be settled before the writing, or when a claim needs a strength or a number attached to it.

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 a research project as a folder on disk — open the run root first, record the user's own instruction verbatim, open the two frame gates and stop for the human to answer them, and keep the stage the ledger says it is. Use when the user asks to start, resume or check a research run, a paper, a review, a brief, a report, a literature review or a protocol.

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。

Record the statements a journal requires and a reader checks — authors with their CRediT contributions, ethics approval that names the body and the reference number, how consent was taken, funding with grant numbers, conflicts of interest, data availability with an address or a reason, and the use of generative AI — as a validated record that the submission folder prints and the manuscript never carries. Use when a run is heading for submission, when an author asks who should be listed, when consent, approval or data sharing has to be stated, or when the venue's AI policy comes up.

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。

Knowledge base from NASA-STD-8729.1A — NASA's R&M (Reliability and Maintainability) standard covering spaceflight and support systems (Revision A, 2017-06-13). Use for NASA's objectives-driven R&M framework — the R&M objectives hierarchy (one Top Objective decomposed into four sub-objectives, paired with tailorable strategies), how R&M requirements are established inside the SMA Plan required by NPR 7120.5, the SMA Technical Authority concurrence/independent-evaluation governance, milestone vs. readiness review gates, the reliability/maintainability/availability vocabulary (Ai vs. Ao, the failure causal chain, risk as a triplet), and the R&M Evidentiary Methods catalogue (FMEA/FMECA, FTA, RBDA, RCM, LORA, plus the space-environment and parts-pedigree analyses). Scoped to NASA spaceflight and support systems and to assurance planning: it is an objectives-and-strategies standard, so it deliberately does NOT prescribe step-by-step analysis procedures (those live in the referenced NASA Preferred Reliability Practices) and is thin on facility R&M, detailed math/derivations, and non-NASA or commercial life cycles.

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。

Comparison of the four guideline-approved psychotherapy approaches in Germany: Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Psychodynamic Therapy, Psychoanalysis, Systemic Therapy — Orientation guide.

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 a DRAFT stakeholder map for one project from the charter, organisation chart, RACI, governance terms, steering minutes, meeting notes and messages the user provides: a stakeholder register, interest and influence ratings each with its stated basis, stance as evidenced by a verbatim fragment with source and date, gaps, and a proposed engagement plan per stakeholder, every line traced to a source and every missing fact marked UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "build the stakeholder map", "who are the stakeholders on this project", "map interest and influence", "where does each stakeholder stand", "draft the stakeholder engagement plan" or "refresh the stakeholder register". Do not use for a customer account's stakeholders, use account-plan-builder instead; for a one-page brief before one meeting, use meeting-prep-onepager; for logging decisions and risks against the project, use project-status-tracker. 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。

Writes a DRAFT weekly KPI report from the figures the user pastes or attaches (this week, last week, optionally target and earlier weeks): a metrics table with change versus last week computed only from the stated figures, plain-language notes per metric, and numbered questions on every figure that moved more than the agreed threshold, crossed its target or broke its run. Use when the user asks to "write the weekly KPI report", "turn these numbers into this week's metrics report", "what changed versus last week", "draft the Monday numbers update" or "add commentary to this metrics table". Do not use for a recurring emailed report with a maintained trend sheet, use report-attachment-analyzer instead; for actuals versus budget, use budget-variance-explainer. 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。