2,096 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Perform complex, long-running research tasks using Gemini Deep Research Agent. Use when asked to research topics requiring multi-source synthesis, competitive analysis, market research, or comprehensive technical investigations that benefit from systematic web search and analysis.
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。
Decision tree analysis for complex decision-making across all domains. Use when user needs to evaluate multiple options with uncertain outcomes, assess risk/reward scenarios, or structure choices systematically. Applicable to business, investment, personal decisions, operations, career choices, product strategy, and any situation requiring structured evaluation. Triggers include decision tree, should I, what if, evaluate options, compare alternatives, risk analysis.
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。
Complete personal finance system — budgeting, debt payoff, investing, tax optimization, net worth tracking, and financial independence planning. Use when managing money, building wealth, paying off debt, planning retirement, or optimizing taxes. Zero dependencies.
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 pitch decks and provides investor-ready feedback with scoring
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。
Conduct comprehensive AI-powered research with citations via the Tavily CLI. Use this skill when the user wants deep research, a detailed report, a comparison, market analysis, literature review, or says "research", "investigate", "analyze in depth", "compare X vs Y", "what does the market look like for", or needs multi-source synthesis with explicit citations. Returns a structured report grounded in web sources. Takes 30-120 seconds. For quick fact-finding, use tavily-search instead.
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。
Investigates DAG incidents with a precise top event, timeline, competing hypotheses, barriers, propagation, and bounded recovery. NOT for automated root-cause classification, trace collection, or performance profiling.
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。
Conduct Critical Decision Method (CDM) interviews to elicit expert reasoning strategies (L3 knowledge) from practitioners about specific challenging past incidents. Use when capturing expertise for skill development, preserving knowledge before practitioner departure, building post-incident learning artifacts, or investigating decisions in complex sociotechnical systems. Outputs structured incident reconstructions with cues, decisions, alternatives considered, and counterfactual analysis suitable for distillation into skills or training material.
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 compliance-ladder design (C0-C6) and transcript-fidelity ladder (T0-T5) plus their adapter conformance fixtures — Codex, Claude Code, Cloudflare, Ollama/LM Studio, custom stdio/HTTP agents — for the two failure modes that make a C-badge or T-fidelity label a lie: the ladder disagreeing with itself across doc/schema/ui/probe surfaces, and a level being reachable by self-report because no daemon-witnessed negative probe actually tries to forge it. Use when designing or freezing a compliance ladder, wiring an adapter conformance probe suite, deciding whether a numeric C-badge or T-label is safe to ship, or investigating a self-attestation or observed-to-controlled bypass risk. NOT for auditing a cryptographic protocol or whitepaper for adversarial soundness (`redteam-review`), writing TLA+/formal invariants for a daemon monitor (`runtime-verification-for-agents`), or agent identity, successor linkage, and reputation across restarts (`agent-identity-continuity-reputation`).
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。