「questions」の検索結果

Reads two or more supplier, bid or tender responses against a requirements list and returns a DRAFT comparison pack: a requirement-by-supplier matrix, gaps per supplier, clarification questions and neutral observations, for an evaluation panel. Never scores, weights, ranks or recommends a winner; the award stays with the panel. Use when the user asks to "compare these bids", "matrix the tender responses against our requirements", "collate the RFQ replies", "show me where each supplier falls short" or "draft clarification questions for the bidders". Do not use for scoring or weighting against agreed criteria, use supplier-evaluation-matrix instead, or for writing the requirements, use rfp-requirements-pack instead. 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。

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or vendor contract in character as a Head of Procurement archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage or clause, commercial risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "review this from a procurement angle", "what would procurement say about this proposal", "pressure-test this vendor contract commercially", "find the holes before the sourcing committee" or "check the renewal terms like a Head of Procurement would". Do not use for liability, IP, regulatory or signing-authority questions, use general-counsel-reviewer instead; for whether the spend fits the budget, use cfo-reviewer; for vendor security, use ciso-reviewer. 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。

Pre-checks one expense claim or travel plan, line by line, against the expense or travel policy the user supplies, and returns a DRAFT precheck sheet: the policy clause matched to each line, the limit quoted as the policy states it, whether the amount sits within, at or outside that limit, missing receipts, pre-approvals or justifications, and neutral questions for the approver and the claimant, with UNKNOWN wherever the policy or the claim is silent. Use when the user asks to "check this expense claim against policy", "pre-check my travel request", "is this claim within policy", "review these expenses before I submit them", "what receipts or approvals are missing" or "prepare the approver's questions for this claim". Do not use for a purchase order log or spend extract, use purchase-order-anomaly-review instead; do not use to compare a policy against a standard or regulation, use policy-gap-review instead. 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。

Flags where a P&ID draft raises a process safety question and points to the candidate evidence an engineer would review (HAZOP register, relief study, SIL assessment, isolation philosophy), as questions and quoted passages with UNKNOWN for missing documents, plus safety functions, relief devices and isolation requirements carried over as stated. Never rates, sizes, classifies, resolves or declares protection adequate. Use when the user asks to "write the process safety flags", "produce the process safety section of the P&ID enrichment", "list which protection questions this P&ID raises" or "map the HAZOP and relief study evidence to the draft" after gate G2, once the piping and instrumentation sections exist. Do not use for proposing loops, alarms or trips from the control philosophy, use instrumentation-and-control-enrichment instead; do not use for checking identifiers, use tagging-and-numbering. 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。

Reads a project or processing description and returns a DRAFT data protection impact assessment pack: processing description, necessity and proportionality questions, a risk table with blank rating cells, mitigations to consider and open questions. Never rates risk, determines the lawful basis or judges adequacy; the DPO assesses and signs. Works from descriptions, never personal data. Use when the user asks to "start a DPIA for the new monitoring tool", "draft a data protection impact assessment", "scaffold a DPIA from this processing description" or "what would the DPO need for a DPIA on this". Do not use for redacting or de-identifying a document, use document-deidentification-pass instead; do not use for working out what data an incident exposed, use data-incident-impact-brief instead. 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。

Ensure design docs explicitly capture risks, assumptions, and open questions with owners, deadlines, and mitigation plans.

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。

Alternative Slowbar coffee intelligence — scientific analysis from seed to cup using First Principle + System Thinking. Covers: varieties, terroir, cultivation, disease diagnosis, processing, roasting physics/chemistry, extraction science, brewing, business strategy, storytelling. ALWAYS trigger for coffee-related questions requiring scientific depth. DO NOT trigger for simple recipes or general food questions. Style: science-driven, farmer-first, quality-obsessed.

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。

Structured 3-phase peer review of a diff or PR — intent, issues by severity, then pointed merge-readiness questions and a verdict. Use for general code review. Not for AI workflow self-fix-and-edit (ai-systems-review) or no-edit devil's-advocate threat models (adversarial-challenge). Phase 3 asks questions only; it is not the adversarial-challenge skill.

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 the user presents an idea/plan/proposal and wants a specific 16-minds (MBTI) personality to ask probing questions back — instead of giving an answer. Triggers on Japanese phrases like 「ENTPでツッコんで」「INFJに問い詰めて」「ENTJ視点で質問して」「このアイデア叩いて」, English equivalents like "as ENTP, question this" / "INFJ would ask what?", or 16-minds commands with a `--ask` flag. AIに「答えさせる」のではなく「問わせる」ためのSkill。ユーザーが思考を整理したい時に使う。

Improve, rewrite, and explain workplace English for an English-as-a-second-language professional in Australia. Use when the user asks to polish, fix, rewrite, improve, or check work emails, Slack or Teams messages, follow-ups, replies to managers or stakeholders, technical explanations, status updates, polite chasing messages, questions, pushback, issue explanations, or similar workplace communication for Australian companies. Ask targeted clarifying questions before rewriting when the intended meaning, recipient, action, deadline, blame, commitment, or technical conclusion is unclear.

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。

Hand off a task with only the context needed to continue in a fresh session. Use for "handoff", "引き継ぎ", "別セッションへ渡す", or "別マシンで続ける". The orca subcommand launches an independent Orca workspace or terminal tab; without it, produce a paste-ready prompt backed by a verified remote branch or PR. Do not launch sessions for capability questions or design requests.

Check the latest Claude (Anthropic), OpenAI Codex, and Google Gemini model releases from official primary sources, update model selections in this dotfiles repo, and update the Claude Code, Codex, and Gemini CLIs through their configured managers. Every run checks both the model settings and CLI for the selected provider, then scans the invoking repository for hardcoded model IDs. Use when the user asks to "モデル更新", "モデルを最新に", "最新モデル確認", "Codex/Claude Code/Gemini CLI本体の更新", "model bump", "update models", or "update agent CLIs". Do NOT use for one-off model selection in a single conversation, general model questions, or unrelated package updates.

Go through an interview that has just finished and sort out what happened: the questions asked and how fully they were answered, which of them were prepared for and which came from the submitted documents, the reverse questions still unanswered, what the employer said about conditions and whether any of it was in writing, and when a result was promised. Use when a user has just come out of an interview and wants to record it while it is fresh or to work out what to fix before the next round; do not use to judge how it went, to estimate whether they will pass, or to read anything into the interviewer's manner.

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。

Prepare for a Japanese job interview by working from the documents already submitted: find where an interviewer will dig in (claims the applicant cannot back up, work described in the first person plural, outcomes with no measure, gaps or overlaps in the employment history, must-have requirements the documents never answer), and turn them into questions to prepare evidence for. Use when a user has an interview scheduled and wants to know what will be asked and what to have ready, or wants to prepare reverse questions from earlier company research; do not use to predict whether they will pass, to write answers containing experience they did not report, or to schedule or contact anyone.

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。

直近N日（デフォルト1日）に更新された `cc-triage-scope` / `cc-pr-created` ラベル付きGitHub Issueのdescriptionとコメントを横断し、繰り返し現れる仕様判断・要件決定のロジックを再利用可能なルールとして抽出して `.claude/requirements/` 配下のタイプ別マークダウンへ集約・統合・圧縮したうえで、commit-push + create-prでPRを作成する（`cc-triage-scope`ラベル + 自分自身をAssignee）。作成したルールは create-issue / create-issue-from-issue-number / answer-issue-questions が仕様作成・判断の材料として読み込む。

Claude Code のセッション記録（~/.claude の履歴・セッションログ・memory）から、週ごとの問い（questions.json）に答える「ナレッジカード」を下書きし、本人が確認・修正したうえで機密スキャンを通し、Notion の「ナレッジカード」DB に提出する。引数なしなら先週（月曜〜日曜）の記録を集計し、確認のうえ Notion に提出する。「Claude Code の履歴をナレッジカードにまとめて」「先週のログからナレッジカードを作って」「ナレッジカードを提出したい」「今週のカードを出して」「週次の振り返りカードを作って」などの依頼で使う。週次のカード提出であり、個人の採点や評価ではない（セッション 1 本の採点は evaluate-session の領域）。

[22] UNDERSTAND. Deep research from all sources — internal (code, git, logs) AND external (web, docs, best practices). Use when choosing libraries, investigating solutions, understanding legal/technical questions, comparing approaches, or anytime you need comprehensive knowledge from both project context and world knowledge. Triggers on "research", "investigate", "find best approach", "what do others do", "compare options", or complex questions requiring multiple 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。

Granolaのローカルアーカイブから会議メモや文字起こしを検索・取得するスキル。同期状態を確認し、必要な更新やSQLによる正確な件数集計も扱います。

• 話題から過去の会議メモを探したいとき
• メモの文字起こしやパネルの取得
• 最近の情報を調べる前の同期状態確認

DiscordにつながるOpenClawのエージェントやセッションへ質問を送り、送信先を確認したうえで、セッション側の判断に任せる投稿や明示指定の投稿を扱います。

• Discord側のエージェントに質問したいとき
• 送信前に宛先を確認したいとき
• 投稿の判断をセッションに任せたいとき

OpenClawの記憶をまとめたWikiを、元資料に基づいて更新・点検します。手書きのメモを保ちながら、ページの重複や情報の矛盾、出典の不足を確認します。

• 元資料からWikiを更新したいとき
• 蓄積した知識を確認・引用したいとき
• 更新後の矛盾や出典不足の点検

会話の開始時に使えるスキルを確認し、応答や作業の前に読み込む手順を定めます。作業方法を決めるスキルを優先し、実行環境ごとの案内につなぎます。

• 会話開始時にスキルを確認したいとき
• 機能開発前にスキルを選びたいとき
• 不具合調査前にスキルを選びたいとき

計画や設計を掘り下げる質問を重ね、内容を具体化しながら設計判断の記録と用語集も作ります。検討と文書化を同じ対話の中で進めたいときに使うスキルです。

• 質問に答えながら計画を詰めたいとき
• 対話で設計を掘り下げたいとき
• 検討中に設計判断を記録したいとき

計画やアイデアを質問で掘り下げ、決定同士の依存関係を整理します。推奨案を添えた質問を段階的に重ね、曖昧な前提や未決事項を確認して共通理解を築くスキルです。

• 実行前に計画を検証したいとき
• アイデアの前提を明確にしたいとき
• 決定の依存関係を整理したいとき

書きたいテーマを質問で掘り下げ、印象的な一文や体験、比喩、考えかけの断片を集めます。構成は決めず、文章の素材を一つのMarkdownファイルに蓄積します。

• 記事の構成を決める前の素材集め
• 体験や観察を文章の断片にしたいとき
• 考えの軸になる比喩や言葉探し