「criterion」の検索結果

Turns decided work — a PRD, design doc, RFC, or thread — into tasks a builder can act on without guessing. Finds slices that each prove something, grounds them in the code, and writes intent, observable criteria with concrete values, the boundary, what the change disturbs, and only the decisions that are hard to reverse. Walks every surface the work exposes and sweeps the nine unwritten requirements, recording each landing as a criterion already in the source, existing behaviour, n/a, or Unresolved — never as a criterion the walk invented. Defaults to one task per source. Use when the user says "write the task", "cut this PRD into tasks", "turn this design doc into work", or "tlc-plan". Do NOT use for discovery itself or to implement — a one-line ticket is a decision; a blank wish is not.

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 a single-point rubric with one criterion and open columns for evidence. Use for student self-assessment, peer feedback, teacher formative feedback, or pre-task planning. Works with any learning target, with or without a band system.

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。

Generate a criterion-referenced rubric with descriptive performance levels for a task or objective. Use for marking guides and general curriculum contexts. For Manning programmes where Competent = success, use coherent-rubric-logic-builder 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。

Kelly criterion optimal sizing with fractional variants, edge estimation, and practical application for crypto trading

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。

Think and work like an expert Cognitive Scientist. Use when a task calls for Cognitive Scientist judgment. Reasons from Marr's levels of analysis, latent processes behind RT and accuracy, and strong inference through PsychoPy paradigms, signal-detection d-prime/criterion, sequential-sampling and ACT-R models, and crossed mixed-effects designs while treating speed-accuracy tradeoffs, criterion shifts, item confounds, and underpowered WEIRD samples as first-class failure modes.

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 pm_uat - verify every acceptance criterion and the human's comments yourself in the browser, on a device, or over a loopback HTTP request, record a verdict per criterion, then move to human_uat or need_revision

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 any case fails or you reject a criterion - what goes in the review_criterion note, the failed case and the numbered need_revision comment, with severity

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 a single-point rubric with one criterion and open columns for evidence. Use for student self-assessment, peer feedback, teacher formative feedback, or pre-task planning. Works with any learning target, with or without a band system.

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。

Generate a criterion-referenced rubric with descriptive performance levels for a task or objective. Use for marking guides and general curriculum contexts. For Manning programmes where Competent = success, use coherent-rubric-logic-builder 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。

Use this skill when writing test-first, behavior-driven acceptance criteria in Given/When/Then format for a Salesforce user story. Covers happy path, edge cases, negative paths, permission boundaries, and data-state preconditions so the AC block can drive UAT scripts and Apex test design downstream. Trigger keywords: given when then, gherkin, behavior driven AC, test first acceptance criteria, scenario outline, BDD acceptance criteria. NOT for the user-story format itself (use admin/user-story-writing-for-salesforce). NOT for UAT script writing (use admin/uat-test-case-design). NOT for Apex test method generation (use agents/test-class-generator). NOT for high-level UAT planning (use admin/uat-and-acceptance-criteria). More triggers: acceptance criteria record, ac_id, req_id on a criterion, artefact under test, negative case for a rule-type requirement, no-match fall-through criterion, oracle for a Then clause, test type apex flow manual, criteria linter, check_ac_format.py, --manifest-dir.

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。

Generate the success criteria for a task or question, then review work against them. Given a task, goal, or open-ended question, decompose it into scenarios, evaluation perspectives, and fine-grained weighted YES/NO criteria using the Recursive Expansion Tree (RET) method; if work is supplied, score it criterion-by-criterion and surface what is missing or could be better. Use when asked to self-review or check your own work, judge whether a task is done well or completely, build a definition-of-done or completeness checklist, create an evaluation rubric or grading criteria, score or grade answers to a question, set up an LLM-as-judge rubric, or when the user mentions self-review, completeness check, success criteria, evaluation criteria, scoring rubric, Qworld, or the RET algorithm.

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。

指定したコミットやブランチなどを基準にコードの変更を確認し、開発規約への適合と仕様の実現を別々にレビューします。二つの観点の指摘を分けて報告するスキルです。

• ブランチやPRの変更レビュー
• 指定コミットやタグ以降の確認
• 文書化された開発規約との照合

Rustの単体・結合・非同期テストを、テストを先に書く流れで整えます。多様な入力の検証、依存先の置き換え、性能測定やカバレッジ確認も扱います。

• Rustをテストから開発したいとき
• 既存コードにテストを追加したいとき
• 非同期処理とタイムアウトの検証

AIエージェントの成果物を、正確さ・網羅性・明瞭さ・実行しやすさ・簡潔さの5軸で自己評価し、根拠付きの点数と優先順位を付けた改善案をまとめます。

• 複数ファイルの実装後の自己評価
• 複数工程を終えた成果物の点検
• 設計文書や分析レポートの評価

End-of-story completion review — verifies each acceptance criterion, checks GDD/ADR deviations, prompts code review, updates status.

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 or edit Excel workbooks with openpyxl-specific pitfall handling, anchored preflight audit, and deterministic post-write proof that every criterion is satisfied

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。

Edit Excel workbooks only after anchored preflight audit, then require deterministic Python/openpyxl post-write proof that every requested criterion is satisfied or explicitly reconciled before finalizing.

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。

Production-grade Bayesian causal inference with PyMC, CausalPy, and DoWhy. Enforces DAG-first thinking, mandatory user checkpoints for assumptions, design-specific refutation, and defensible reporting with causal language guardrails. Trigger on: causal inference, causal effect estimation, treatment effects, counterfactuals, difference-in-differences (DiD), synthetic control, regression discontinuity (RDD), interrupted time series (ITS), instrumental variables (IV), propensity scores, DAGs, causal graphs, confounders, backdoor criterion, do-calculus, interventional distributions, pm.do(), pm.observe(), CausalPy, DoWhy, mediation analysis, refutation, sensitivity analysis, parallel trends, placebo tests, or any question of the form "does X cause Y" or "what is the effect of X on Y."

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。

Apply the ScholarEval framework to systematically evaluate scholarly work across quality dimensions (novelty, rigor, significance, and clarity). Use to critique academic papers, research proposals, literature reviews, or grant applications and produce a structured, criterion-based 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。

Calculate risk-based position sizes for long stock trades. Use when user asks about position sizing, how many shares to buy, risk per trade, Kelly criterion, ATR-based sizing, fractional-share sizing, or portfolio risk allocation. Supports stop-loss distance calculation, volatility scaling, and sector concentration checks.

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 UI or design against WCAG 2.2 AA/AAA and ARIA patterns, returning criterion-referenced findings with severity and specific fixes. Use when the user wants an accessibility check, contrast verification, keyboard/screen-reader review, or wants to confirm a component meets POUR.

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。

Confirm a change before merge. `/check verify` drives the real app to prove behavior against the spec (every acceptance criterion met, every surface built). `/check review` runs a senior code review on a fresh model, one that did not write the code. Verify after /develop, review before a PR. Writes to docs/reviews/, never edits code.

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。

Quality gate: verify each acceptance criterion of a completed task/work unit, run quality checks, and create follow-up tasks for gaps. Use before merging or to audit delivered work. Invoked as /agiflow:review-work <work-unit-or-task>. Uses get_work_unit, get_task, update_task, create_task, create_task_comment.

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 a single Todo task through In Progress to Review, meeting every acceptance criterion with tests and vibe-lint checks. Refuses Planning-status tasks. Invoked as /agiflow:run-task <task>. Uses get_task, update_task, create_task_comment.

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。