「rubric」の検索結果

Orchestrating super-premium landing-page pipelines (Discover to Launch) across 6 craft axes with rubrics and quality gates. Not for a single LP section (Funnel) or design-only chains (Atelier).

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。

Runs the evals of a BMad skill through the agent harness the user works in and reports what they show: baseline against the bare model, variant against a stripped or prior version, quality against a rubric, and trigger accuracy of the description with an optional optimization loop. Use when the user asks to evaluate, benchmark, test the triggers of, grade, or compare versions of a skill, or when the bmad-toolsmith skill asks for an eval of a skill it built.

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 needs a comprehensive marketing plan for a client, a company they advise, or their own product. Also use when the user mentions "marketing plan," "growth plan," "GTM plan," "go-to-market plan," "AARRR plan," "90-day marketing plan," "12-month marketing roadmap," "fractional CMO plan," or "fCMO plan." Generates an exhaustive 13-section plan structured by AARRR (Acquisition, Activation, Retention, Referral, Revenue), customized to the client's current budget, team, and stage, mapped to future funding milestones, cross-referenced with the 139-idea marketing-ideas library and an embedded 17-section current-state audit rubric, with a full marketing operations stack showing which skills and MCP/API integrations execute each part. Outputs a Notion-paste-ready markdown document. For positioning and ICP context before planning, see product-marketing. For stage-specific deep work, see onboarding, signup, emails, referrals, pricing.

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。

Exploit-DB and searchsploit reference — EDB→Metasploit module mappings, PoC reliability rubric, CVSS tier quick reference, and searchsploit usage patterns

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。

Returns the frozen gate constants — question, header, option labels and descriptions, digest field-list, and preview content — for every catalog gate. Invoked by the team lead fresh on arrival at each gate and on pulse re-emissions, in the same turn as the render. The transport contract, three renders, partition rule, and authoring rubric live in swarm:workflow-rules.

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 measurable validation criteria when no existing standards apply. Invoked by team agents during 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。

MD3 vocabulary, component catalog, and a compliance-audit rubric across Web/Flutter/Compose. Use for MD3 tokens/components or an audit -- RIPDPI disables dynamic color (see android-compose-patterns).

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。

Runs a deliberative two-model committee of GPT-6 Astra and Claude Opus under a selectable chair, Fable by default, with `/model-committee-astra`, `/model-committee-opus`, and `/model-committee-sol` selecting the others. Use when a consequential decision has several defensible options and two model families should propose, critique, revise, and cross-rank them against a predeclared rubric before converging, as in research design, interpretation, architecture, manuscript strategy, or evaluation design. Not for factual lookups, independent-coder reliability, brainstorming, routine implementation, or final professional judgment.

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。

Audits a methods section against a 45-item reporting checklist synthesized from the APSA Experimental Section rubric, JARS-Quant, CONSORT, and DA-RT, covering pre-registration, recruitment, randomization and treatments, sample flow and attrition, sample-size justification, three-tier results labeling, conjoint reporting, validity, and open-science infrastructure. Use when checking whether a methods section reports enough, preparing a submission or replication archive, asking what CONSORT, JARS, or DA-RT require, or documenting a deviation from a pre-analysis plan. Writing that plan before data collection goes to pre-registration-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。

Run one consequential, contestable decision through a deliberative committee of GPT-6 Astra and Claude Opus, chaired by fable (default), astra, opus, or sol. Not for factual lookups, brainstorming, routine implementation, independent-coder reliability, or final professional judgment. Use when several options are defensible and the two model families should propose, critique, revise, and cross-rank under a predeclared rubric.

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 methods section against a 45-item checklist drawn from the APSA Experimental Section rubric, JARS-Quant, CONSORT, and DA-RT. Use before submission or archiving, or to document a pre-analysis-plan deviation.

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 performance using a structured scoring rubric

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 opening a PR, or whenever asked to self-review a diffusers contribution. Applies the same rubric as the `@claude` CI (checks the diff against references/review-rules.md, traces call paths for dead code). Reports findings grouped by severity, flagging what to fix before submitting (blocking issues + dead code) vs what to leave for the actual review. Report-only — does not edit files.

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。

Rates any SKILL.md on a 0-100 scale across 10 dimensions with a SHIP / REWORK / SCRAP verdict. Evaluates trigger precision, instruction clarity, output predictability, edge case coverage, anti-hallucination guardrails, developer experience, composability, open-source readiness, wow factor, and real-world utility. No flattery — calibrated against Anthropic's own skill-creator rubric. Use this skill whenever someone says "score this skill", "rate my skill", "is this skill good", "skill review", "skill audit", "roast my SKILL.md", "grade this", "will this skill work", "evaluate my skill", "how good is this", or pastes a SKILL.md and asks for feedback. Also trigger when comparing two skills, benchmarking a skill collection, or asking "what's wrong with this skill" — even without the word "score".

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。

Scores and strengthens startup pitch decks (pre-seed through Series A) against 35 investor-grade criteria grounded in Sequoia, DocSend, YC, a16z, and Carta data. Use when the user has shared a pitch deck (PDF, PPTX, markdown, pasted slide text, or a link to one) and asks for a review, score, feedback, or critique. A full review takes about 15–25 minutes, 40 or more for a long investor deck, so for a general pitch question with no deck, answer briefly in chat and offer the review instead of starting it. When it runs, score with the rubric, never with deck advice from memory.

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。

Rates responses and plans against quality rubrics. Used for plan validation, response quality audits, and multi-agent consensus.

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。

Audits and optimizes the five global Claude layers (User Preferences, Styles, Global Memory, Skills, MCP Connectors) using the Global Layer Scorecard (six dimensions, anchored 1-5 rubrics). Detects eight cross-layer failure modes and produces evolutionary recommendations (Promotion, Demotion, Codification, Skill Extraction). Use when user says "audit my global setup," "optimize my preferences," "review my Claude configuration," "check my cross-project setup," "are my preferences working," "clean up my global memory," or "what should be in my preferences vs my project." Also use when a user has 3+ Projects and wants to improve their shared foundation. Do NOT use for single-Project audits, Project Memory optimization, or full-stack audits (use rootnode-project-audit, rootnode-memory-optimization, or rootnode-full-stack-audit respectively, if available). Run on Opus 5 or Sonnet 5 at `high` effort (both defaults); depth reduces on legacy models.

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。

Audits and scores Claude Projects using a six-dimension Scorecard with anchored 1-5 rubrics and detects seven structural anti-patterns. When global layer info is provided, adds cross-layer alignment findings. Use when user says "audit my project," "review my custom instructions," "score my project," "evaluate my Claude project," "improve my system prompt," "what's wrong with my project," "why is my project underperforming." Also trigger on symptom-phrased: "my project doesn't work right," "Claude is inconsistent in my project," "my Project used to work and now doesn't." Also use when the user pastes Custom Instructions asking why output is poor or generic. Do NOT use when the user's primary request is a global-layer audit (use rootnode-global-audit if available), single-prompt evaluation (use rootnode-prompt-validation if available), or Memory-only optimization (use rootnode-memory-optimization if available). Run on Opus 5 or Sonnet 5 at `high` effort (both defaults); depth reduces on legacy models.

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。

Generalised autonomous optimisation loop — soft RLVR for any artifact a user can measure. Use this skill whenever a user wants to iteratively improve an artifact — code, prompts, documents, configs, designs, content — by running structured experiments, evaluating results against a multi-dimensional rubric, and learning from each attempt. Triggers include: "optimise this", "keep improving until it's good", "run experiments on", "autoresearch", "iterate on this overnight", "try different approaches and pick the best", or any request implying repeated evaluate-and-improve cycles. Also use when the user wants to improve a system prompt, a data pipeline, a writing style, or any artifact where quality can be decomposed into measurable tracks. For inference optimisation tasks (model latency, throughput, quantization, GPU deployment), a* delegates the low-level tuning to AITune while maintaining quality tracking and learning.

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。

Generalised autonomous optimisation loop — soft RLVR for any artifact a user can measure. Web runtime package: uses memory in this order: connector-backed, project-pack, none. Never assumes subprocess access or unrestricted local files. Use this skill whenever a user wants to iteratively improve an artifact — code, prompts, documents, configs, designs, content — by running structured experiments, evaluating results against a multi-dimensional rubric, and learning from each attempt. Triggers include: "optimise this", "keep improving until it's good", "run experiments on", "autoresearch", "iterate on this overnight", "try different approaches and pick the best", or any request implying repeated evaluate-and-improve 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。

Use when asked to create a multi-session learning plan. Returns a milestoned plan, practice, and review rubric. Don't use for tasks that require source or remote-system changes.

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 visual needs repeatable fixed-view rendering and independent rubric scoring. Not for free-form visual review or subjective critique.

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 thumbnail concepts need real-size, accuracy-first scoring without misleading claims. Not for generating thumbnails or declaring winners that fail the accuracy rubric.

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。

Interview Question Generator — produces 40-60 questions across behavioral (STAR), technical, culture, situational categories with scoring rubrics and recommended loop structure

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。