「claims」の検索結果

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。

• 顧客への返信を承認制にしたいとき
• 承認本文と送信結果を記録したいとき
• 修正前の承認による送信を防ぎたいとき

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。

• 投資家向け説明資料を作成・改訂したいとき
• 投資家向け概要資料やメモを作りたいとき
• 収益予測と資金使途表を作りたいとき

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。

• 記事や論文から調査用の知識集を作成
• 新しい資料を既存のノートに追加
• 出典付きの回答や比較を保存

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 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。

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。

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。

Formulates evidence-bounded scientific questions, candidate hypotheses, rival explanations, causal or associational claims, discriminating predictions, measurements, and preregistration-ready analysis plans. Used when turning observations or preliminary findings into transparent, testable research plans without treating hypotheses as facts.

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。

Read one supplied paper closely enough to reconstruct how its authors actually got there, rather than restating what the abstract claims. Use for 精读论文, 讲透这篇论文, 把这篇读懂, 作者为什么这么设计, 这个公式怎么推出来的, paper x-ray, and deep single-paper comprehension before building on, reviewing, presenting, or citing that paper. Recovers the real starting point and the bet the authors placed, separates load-bearing design from decoration, grounds each key formula in a worked micro-example with concrete numbers, and checks how far the evidence actually reaches, including where the authors are confident and where the paper does not report something. Delivers a structured Markdown long-read by default. Not a summary, not a translation, not a 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。

Find and verify Nature/CNS-family literature supporting manuscript claims, with claim-to-source mapping and reference-manager export. Use for Nature系列引用、CNS支撑文献、分段补引用 when this journal scope is requested; use broader literature search for unrestricted sources.

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 an agent, harness, gateway, MCP workflow, or multi-step automation claims completion and the available traces, checkpoints, approvals, tool calls, or deployment records must be judged without trusting self-reported success.

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 before responding to pressure for agreement, manufactured urgency, authority appeals, or requests to certify unsupported claims; separate evidence from persuasion and state uncertainty.

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 after generating code, after accepting AI suggestions, or when reviewing AI-written modules. Also use when code works but feels brittle, when error handling seems thin, when orphaned resources or missing cleanup are suspected, or when the agent claims done but hidden debt may exist. Catches the specific failure patterns AI agents produce that humans would not.

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 and own a defensible market position. Use when messaging sounds like competitors, conversion is weak despite awareness, repositioning a product, or testing positioning claims. Includes Crawl-Walk-Run rollout methodology and the word change that improved enterprise deal progression.

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。

Three-layer verification pipeline for AI output. Extracts verifiable claims, finds supporting or contradicting sources via web search, runs adversarial review for hallucination patterns, and produces a structured verification report with source links for human 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。

Load when the user asks to add, import, compile, or ingest a research paper/PDF into OpenViking, especially when they mention ov-add-paper, ARA, claims, evidence, figures, tables, or paper-to-OV knowledge resources.

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 content against your brand voice, style guide, and messaging pillars, flagging deviations by severity with specific before/after fixes. Use when checking a draft before it ships, when auditing copy for voice consistency and terminology, or when screening for unsubstantiated claims, missing disclaimers, and other legal flags.

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 PR the way a seasoned maintainer would — build an independent model before seeing the diff, investigate the implementation and history, verify material claims, and return a concise briefing. Use for any PR review, self-review, or re-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。

Use when an RFP, RFI, RFQ, security questionnaire, vendor questionnaire, or proposal request arrives and the team needs a structured response — parsing multi-section buyer-dictated requirements (MANDATORY vs WEIGHTED vs NICE-TO-HAVE), building a Shipley-method proof-point matrix mapping each requirement to a verifiable proof point, articulating 3-5 win-themes that ladder up across requirements, and producing a Shipley-derived winrate estimate that informs a bid / no-bid / partner-bid recommendation. For Bid Managers, Proposal Leads, Directors of Sales, and Sales Engineers at the response-strategy moment. Surfaces GAP requirements explicitly — never invents claims. NOT free-form proposal narrative authoring, NOT contract redline, NOT marketing collateral.

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。