「ambiguity」の検索結果

Turn an interpretive-ambiguity audit of a legal text — contract, statute, regulation, or judicial opinion — into a polished deliverable. Produces a multi-page website (default), a single-page interactive site, a Microsoft Word document, a PowerPoint deck, or a LaTeX/PDF. Use whenever a user has a stress-test result, ambiguity audit, or "where will this be litigated" scenarios and wants to publish, present, or share them. Triggers on "publish the audit," "make a report from this," "turn this into a website / deck / brief / Word doc," "make a Netlify site," "build slides of these ambiguities," "render the scenarios," "package this stress test," "produce a LaTeX version," and similar. Pairs with the ambiguity-stress-test skill (the underlying analysis) but works on any structured or semi-structured ambiguity analysis. Visual design is opinionated but the user can override colors, fonts, and brand label. Most formats need Python and a writable filesystem; single-file HTML works where the host has neither.

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。

Adversarially stress-tests a legal text — a contract, statute, regulation, or judicial opinion — for interpretive ambiguity: it finds the seams where the people governed by it will later disagree about what it means and turns each into a concrete dispute scenario with both sides' arguments, the likely outcome, and a fix. Use it whenever someone wants to pressure-test, red-team, audit, or find weak spots, loopholes, gaps, ambiguities, or drafting problems in a legal document; whenever a drafter wants to tighten a contract, statute, regulation, or opinion before it issues; whenever a litigator wants to mine an opinion or contract for arguments; or whenever someone hands over a legal text and asks where it will be fought over or for issue-spotting. Trigger it for contract review, statutory-ambiguity analysis, judicial-opinion scope analysis, and drafting QA — even if the user never says "stress-test" or "ambiguity."

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。

Mathematically rigorous Socratic interview system that drives ambiguity below 20% before any code is written. One question per message, weighted ambiguity scoring, brownfield-aware, outputs a complete PRD. Replaces discovery-interview with a stricter protocol.

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。

Hoyeon ambiguity-resolution interview for Codex. Use when the user invokes "$hoyeon-clarify", "/clarify", asks to keep asking until clear, remove ambiguity, clarify requirements/design/domain/plan, or says Korean phrases like "모호한 게 없게", "명확해질 때까지", "질문 계속해", or "Q&A로 정리".

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。

"/clarify", "clarify this", "keep asking until clear", "remove ambiguity", "clarify requirements", "clarify design", "clarify the plan", "질문 계속해", "모호한 게 없게", "명확해질 때까지", "계속 물어봐", "Q&A로 정리", "질문답변 기록", "요구사항 명확화", "설계 명확화". Relentless ambiguity-resolution interview that records Q&A under .hoyeon/clarify/<topic>/ and hands off to specify/blueprint/docs when clear.

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-routing ambiguity analysis — scores request clarity and asks clarifying questions when needed (inspired by ouroboros)

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 for sensemaking, frame revision, anomaly handling, questioning strategy, and ambiguity diagnosis with the Data/Frame model before action is chosen. NOT for deterministic classification, settled execution planning, or situations where the frame is already stable.

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。

Collapse meaningful ambiguity with contrastive examples. Use when a plan/design has several plausible meanings, requirements feel vague, examples would clarify intent faster than grilling, or the user asks to disambiguate, find ambiguity, use behavioral kernels, or ask contrastive 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。

Systematic ambiguity resolution through tiered information gathering. Use when facing unclear requirements, unknown context, uncertain implementation choices, or any situation where guessing would be risky.

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。

Determine ambiguity audit scope, enumerate source documents from filesystem, and persist rubric file bindings

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。

Execute ambiguity audit document-by-document with implementer simulation, rubric scoring, cross-layer checks, remediation, and verdicting

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。

Orchestrate ambiguity auditing across selected layers with rubric-driven scoring, remediation flow, and next-step gating

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 for sensemaking, frame revision, anomaly handling, questioning strategy, and ambiguity diagnosis with the Data/Frame model before action is chosen. NOT for deterministic classification, settled execution planning, or situations where the frame is already stable.

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 audits native-unit capacity reservation, serial admission, ambiguity holds, stop reserves, effect closure, and control-disjoint settlement handoff for consequential agent attempts. Use when scarce capacity must be conserved across retry, rework, resurrection, or compensation. NOT for scheduling work, choosing models, pricing unlike resources into one scalar, authorizing effects, grading work, paying workers, or asserting runtime containment.

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。

Parse a structured design brief written in I-Lang protocol format into a concrete design spec. Eliminates ambiguity from vague requests like "make it professional" by requiring explicit dimensions: palette, typography, layout, mood, density, and constraints. Trigger keywords: "design brief", "create a design brief", "ilang brief", "structured brief".

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。

Internal downstream skill for ctf-sandbox-orchestrator. CTF-sandbox workflow for parser differentials, HTTP normalization gaps, ambiguous headers, path decoding drift, transfer-framing mismatches, and request smuggling routes. Use when the user asks to trace proxy and backend parse differences, conflicting path normalization, Host or forwarded-header ambiguity, CL/TE issues, or routing outcomes that differ across hops. Use only after `$ctf-sandbox-orchestrator` has already established sandbox assumptions and routed here.

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。

Socratic deep interview with mathematical ambiguity gating before explicit execution approval

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。

Socratic deep interview with mathematical ambiguity gating before execution

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。

Task lifecycle management with stable task IDs. Add, complete, defer, remove, and review tasks with deterministic action routing and fail-closed ambiguity handling. Maintains a running task list as a brain page.

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。

Query decomposition and multi-source search orchestration. Breaks natural language questions into targeted searches per source, translates queries into source-specific syntax, ranks results by relevance, and handles ambiguity and fallback strategies.

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。

Clarify WHAT a phase delivers with ambiguity scoring; produces a SPEC.md before discuss-phase.

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。

Autonomous senior-operator mode for AI agents that resolve tasks end to end without babysitting and never create new problems. The agent verifies every claim against real evidence (web search dated to the current month and year, the codebase, and available tools, MCPs, and CLIs); it never guesses, never fakes confidence, and never claims something is done without proof. It stays silent and keeps working, interrupting the user only on three stops, namely a destructive or irreversible action, a dead-end with no evidence after exhausting sources, or genuine ambiguity that changes the outcome. Output is short, literal, and human. Use when the user says "not-your-babysitter", "nanny mode", "work autonomously", "stop babysitting", or "no hand-holding", or wants an agent that solves problems on its own, especially hands-on engineering and operational tasks. Do not use when the user explicitly wants a tutorial, a verbose walkthrough, or open-ended brainstorming.

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 prompts for minimal tokens, maximal clarity, and low ambiguity for LLM consumption.

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 English text must be parsed without a human to resolve ambiguity — tool descriptions, error messages, inter-agent instructions, system prompts, status reports — and misreading has a real cost, or when text reads as dense, hedged, or easy to misparse. Triggers: disambiguate, STE100 rewrite, apply Simplified Technical English, plain-language rewrite, controlled-language rewrite, rewrite so an agent cannot misread this. Not for creative or marketing copy.

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。