708 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
[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 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。
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。
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。
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。
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。
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。
顧客や取引先への返信案を人の承認に結び付け、承認された本文と送信先、送信結果を記録します。修正前の古い承認による送信や、複数の担当処理による重複送信を防ぐ設計です。
投資家向けの説明資料や財務モデル、資金使途表、応募書類を作成・更新し、事業実績や収益の前提、調達額、チーム情報の食い違いを複数の資料で確認するスキル。
記事・論文・メモを要約し、相互リンク付きのMarkdown知識集として蓄積。出典を残しながら質問への回答や比較をまとめ、矛盾やリンク切れも点検します。
After you give a substantive answer or draft that the user may act on — advice or recommendations, drafted artifacts such as goals, plans, pitches, proposals, or emails, estimates or projections, analysis or interpretation of data, factual claims they may rely on, or a multi-step argument — invoke this skill BEFORE finalizing your reply and then, if it applies, append 2-3 short follow-up questions, each tied to something specific in what you just produced, that help the user check key facts, probe the reasoning or assumptions, and notice missing context. Do this at most once per conversation. Skip it when the user asked a trivial how-to or simple lookup, wants a purely educational explanation, asked you only to format, convert, or assemble a file from content they provided, is writing code they will run, is doing creative writing or casual chat, or already asked you to double-check, cite, or review — the skill file explains these boundaries and the exact output format.
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。
Static security scan of a harness's declared MCP surface via `harness mcp-scan {path}`. Reads `.mcp/servers.json` + `.harness/claims.json`. Pure-read, no dispatch. Exits 1 on findings at or above `--fail-on` severity.
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。
Checks an AI team run against its acceptance criteria using the evidence bundle. Use when the user asks whether the work is done or correct, or before completing a run. Separates verified evidence from agent 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。
Use when auditing content pages for citation quality, suggesting authoritative sources to link for factual claims, or reviewing whether a page's external link attributes (nofollow, noopener) are correctly set.
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。
Deep research harness — fan-out web searches, fetch sources, adversarially verify claims, synthesize a cited report.
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。
Rewrite AI-sounding text so it reads like the writer without changing what it says. Use when editing or reviewing prose for AI tells: not-X-but-Y contrasts, one-line closers, staged openers, forced triads, dashes everywhere, inflated claims, sales language, stock AI words, bold labels, or filler. Based on Wikipedia's "Signs of AI writing."
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。
When the user wants to create competitor comparison or alternative pages for SEO and buyer-facing use. Also use when the user mentions 'alternative page,' 'vs page,' 'competitor comparison,' 'comparison page,' '[Product] vs [Product],' '[Product] alternative,' 'competitive landing pages,' 'how do we compare to X,' 'competitor teardown,' 'audit our competitor pages,' 'are our comparison pages out of date,' or 'competitive asset audit.' Use this for any content that positions your product against competitors. Covers four formats: singular alternative, plural alternatives, you vs competitor, and competitor vs competitor. For auditing existing claims (not researching competitors from scratch, which is competitor-profiling; not technical SEO on these pages, which is seo-audit), use the asset audit here. For internal battle cards and sales-specific competitor docs, see sales-enablement.
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。
When the user wants to write, rewrite, or improve marketing copy for any page, including homepage, landing pages, pricing pages, feature pages, about pages, or product pages. Also use when the user says "write copy for," "improve this copy," "rewrite this page," "marketing copy," "headline help," "CTA copy," "value proposition," "tagline," "hero section copy," "this copy is weak," "this sounds like AI," "AI slop," "make it sound human," or "help me describe my product." Use this whenever someone is working on website text that needs to persuade or convert. Drafts never use AI tells like "it's not X, it's Y" reveals, "no X, no Y, no Z" lists, or sentences that trail into extra comma clauses. For email copy, see emails. For popup copy, see popups. For editing existing copy, see copy-editing. For the offer underneath the copy (bonuses, guarantees, value framing), see offers. Claims must be supportable, and a declined claim names the evidence that would unlock 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。
Supports research proposal preparation and review for NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA, and Taiwan NSTC, including opportunity-specific requirements, aims, review criteria, budgets, broader impacts, forms, and resubmissions. Use for investigator-authored grant development, compliance matrices, and proposal critiques.
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。
Evaluates scientific claims and evidence quality. Applies to experimental design validity, biases and confounders, statistical interpretation, evidence grading frameworks (GRADE, Cochrane Risk of Bias), and teaching critical analysis. Supports evidence appraisal and identifying flaws; formal peer review writing belongs to peer-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。