Audit an Anthropic Cookbook notebook based on a rubric. Use whenever a notebook review or audit is requested.
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。
254 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Audit an Anthropic Cookbook notebook based on a rubric. Use whenever a notebook review or audit is requested.
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。
Score a website's AI answer-engine visibility 0–100 against the open AIV rubric, and, with the user's own API keys, check and track through the OpenAI, Perplexity, Gemini and Anthropic APIs whether AI engines actually cite it. Use when the user wants to know whether AI engines can find, parse, trust and cite their site, or whether they do. Triggers on: 'does ChatGPT cite us', 'AI citation rate', 'share of voice in AI answers', 'track AI visibility weekly', 'AIV', 'AI visibility', 'GEO audit', 'generative engine optimization', 'AEO', 'llms.txt', 'will AI cite my site', 'AI search ranking', 'get cited by ChatGPT'.
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。
Evaluate WooAIAssistant against a structured scenario suite with hard invariants + LLM-as-judge rubric scoring. Runs live against the demo store + gpt-5.1 via the woo-mobile-ai backend wrapper, writes a JSONL run record, compares against stored baselines, and surfaces regressions. Always delegated to a subagent so the main context only sees the markdown 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。
Provides weighted scoring, rubrics, and decision-threshold patterns. Use when designing quality gates, evaluation systems, or decision frameworks.
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。
Creates structured hiring scorecards for any role. Takes job title, requirements, and team context. Generates comprehensive scorecard with weighted scoring rubric, interview questions per competency, evaluation matrix, red/green flags, and reference check questions.
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 designing a study that benchmarks AI systems against a human-expert panel, before data collection. Plans the arms, decoupled rubrics with anchors, planted calibration probes, reviewer panel, inter-rater reliability targets and LLM-as-judge versus human adjudication.
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。
Evaluate Agent Skill design quality with an opinionated, practice-derived rubric informed by public specifications and examples. Use when reviewing, auditing, comparing, or improving SKILL.md files and skill packages. Produces evidence-backed findings, optional multi-dimensional scoring, and prioritized changes; treat the result as diagnostic guidance, not official certification or a universal standard.
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。
This skill should be used when the user asks to "implement LLM-as-judge", "compare model outputs", "create evaluation rubrics", "mitigate evaluation bias", or mentions direct scoring, pairwise comparison, position bias, evaluation pipelines, or automated quality assessment.
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 automated evaluation suites for AI agents using golden datasets, rubrics, and regression gates. Use when shipping agent features, validating prompt changes, or gating deployments on quality.
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。
Learning designer quality check for Canvas LMS courses. Audits module structure, content completeness, publishing state, date consistency, and rubric coverage. Use when asked to "QC a course", "is this course ready", "pre-semester check", or "quality 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。
Bulk grading workflows for Canvas LMS assignments using rubrics. Covers single grading, batch grading, and code execution strategies with safety-first dry runs.
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 Request for Proposals with requirements specifications, evaluation criteria, scoring rubrics, timelines, and compliance requirements
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。
TRIGGER THIS when preparing interviews, planning hiring processes, creating interview questions, building evaluation frameworks, developing interviewer guides, or standardizing interview approaches. Builds complete interview kits with competency-based questions, scorecards, rubrics, interviewer training, and structured evaluation protocols.
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 weak-agent adversarial test harness against docx-cli. Spawns weak exercise agents (Haiku by default, Sonnet to probe, or a local agent harness's pre-produced runs) to perform real document tasks over six scenarios — five editing (MNDA form-fill + font fidelity, invoice table-edit/restructure + logo replace, résumé styling, contract redlining + commenting, contract finalize via accept/reject + comment reply/resolve) and one authoring (T. S. Eliot poetry journal: multi-column, verse, footnotes, links, figure) — renders every result with Word, has opus judge them against ground-truth rubrics, measures each exercise's tool economy, token cost, wall-clock, and correctness (from transcripts for Claude, the exercise.json ledger for the local harness), and synthesizes a prioritized ergonomics report. Use when the user says 'adversarial review', 'test docx-cli with weak agents', 'run the haiku harness', 'weak agent test', or wants to re-run yesterday's adversarial process.
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 reproducible evaluations for AI agents with representative task sets, explicit rubrics, appropriate graders, baselines, regression gates, and failure analysis. Use when defining agent quality, comparing prompts or models, validating a release, measuring tool-use reliability, investigating regressions, or deciding whether an agent is ready for production.
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。
Audit a website against the Forter Agentic Readiness Guide. Loads the 25 weighted rubrics in `audit/`, probes the target site (and optional source code), scores each guideline Pass/Partial/Fail/N/A with sub-check granularity, and produces a prioritized fix report. Use when a user asks "score my site against the agentic readiness guide", "audit https://… for agent readiness", or "what do I need to fix to be agent-ready".
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。
Patterns and techniques for evaluating and improving AI agent outputs. Use this skill when: - Implementing self-critique and reflection loops - Building evaluator-optimizer pipelines for quality-critical generation - Creating test-driven code refinement workflows - Designing rubric-based or LLM-as-judge evaluation systems - Adding iterative improvement to agent outputs (code, reports, analysis) - Measuring and improving agent response quality
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。
Add fast, local, typed decisions to any project with Laya, an open-source non-generative decision model (pip install laya). It classifies, routes, scores and answers yes/no questions about a piece of text, returning calibrated probabilities in roughly 20-35 ms on a laptop GPU, with no LLM call and no data leaving the machine. Use this skill whenever the user wants to classify or route text, triage tickets or emails, detect spam, phishing, toxicity or intent, put a guardrail in front of an agent or LLM, score something against a rubric, or replace an LLM-based classifier to cut latency or cost. Also use it when they mention Laya, Jev, a "System 1 model", "typed decisions" or a "decision model", even if they never name Laya.
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。
Advanced Evaluation workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs This skill should be used when the user asks to "implement LLM-as-judge", "compare model outputs", "create evaluation rubrics", "mitigate evaluation bias", or mentions direct scoring, pairwise comparison, position bias, evaluation pipelines, or automated quality assessment and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing 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。
Advanced Evaluation workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs This skill should be used when the user asks to "implement LLM-as-judge", "compare model outputs", "create evaluation rubrics", "mitigate evaluation bias", or mentions direct scoring, pairwise comparison, position bias, evaluation pipelines, or automated quality assessment and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing 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。
Suede AI eval design and coverage audit: AI-SPEC, failure-mode rubric with severity scoring, concrete pass/fail eval cases, coverage and infrastructure scores, and mechanical acceptance gates. Use when a change ships LLM, RAG, agent, classifier, prompt, or generated-media behavior, or when asked to write evals for an AI feature, design test cases for a model surface, audit existing eval coverage, or judge whether AI behavior is safe to ship. No AI-SPEC means no eval plan, and no eval plan holds the recommended ship verdict. NOT FOR: reviewing or grading the implementation code behind the AI surface (use suede-code); wiring a passing suite into CI as a required check (use suede-ci-gate); UAT of the built feature beyond the eval suite (a private Suede Labs companion, not in this pack).
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 a task is in code_review - how to read the diff, which findings block, and the verdict move
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。
Audit a website against the Forter Agentic Readiness Guide. Loads the 25 weighted rubrics in `audit/`, probes the target site (and optional source code), scores each guideline Pass/Partial/Fail/N/A with sub-check granularity, and produces a prioritized fix report. Use when a user asks "score my site against the agentic readiness guide", "audit https://… for agent readiness", or "what do I need to fix to be agent-ready".
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。
Designs and runs reproducible evaluations for AI agents, prompts, tools, skills, and model-backed workflows using realistic datasets, isolated baselines, objective assertions, rubric grading, trajectory analysis, cost/latency tracking, and regression comparison. Use when measuring agent quality, optimizing skill triggering, comparing prompts or models, or gating an AI feature release. Not for ordinary deterministic unit tests.
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。