AI-powered adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector design for gene therapy including capsid engineering, promoter selection, and tropism optimization.
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 and implement context-fit frontend interfaces with deliberate art direction, accessible interaction, responsive behavior, complete states, and rendered verification. Use when creating or substantially reworking pages, components, product workspaces, dashboards, marketing sites, editorial surfaces, commerce flows, or justified immersive experiences.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Create interfaces that are fit for their users, tasks, content, product category, and technical constraints. "Best" means fitness for context, not adherence to one visual style.
Accessibility, functional correctness, valid implementation examples, and usable responsive behavior are hard gates. Do not approve a visually impressive result that creates keyboard traps, inaccessible controls, unreadable content, broken states, severe responsive defects, or unjustified performance costs.
Use these weights to compare viable design choices. They are an operational decision rubric, not a universal mathematical standard, and they never compensate for a hard-gate failure.
| Criterion | Weight |
|---|---|
| User and task fit | 20% |
| Accessibility | 20% |
| Usability and information architecture | 15% |
| Visual coherence and appropriate distinctiveness | 15% |
| Responsive and adaptive behavior | 10% |
| Performance and resilience | 10% |
| Interaction and state completeness | 5% |
| Maintainability and verification | 5% |
When criteria conflict, protect the primary task and hard gates first. Record any deliberate compromise that remains.
Keep planning proportional. A small component change may need a few explicit decisions, not a lengthy design document.
Choose the mode from the product's purpose, not from a fashionable aesthetic.
Use for applications, admin tools, and operational interfaces.
Use for landing pages, launches, portfolios, and promotional sites.
Use for analytics, monitoring, and decision-support interfaces.
Use for articles, publications, documentation, and media-rich content.
Use for shopping, booking, applications, onboarding, and transactional services.
Use only when the request and product context justify an expressive experience.
Preloaders, smooth-scroll libraries, custom cursors, magnetic buttons, parallax, pinned sections, horizontal scroll journeys, WebGL, GSAP, Lenis, Framer Motion, and React Three Fiber are optional techniques, not quality requirements. Introduce one only when it materially supports the design objective and the project can afford its accessibility, performance, and maintenance cost.
Use WCAG 2.2 Level AA as the baseline. Distinguish normative requirements from stronger recommendations.
Read Accessibility Checklist when the task includes forms, dialogs, complex widgets, destructive actions, dense data, or an accessibility review.
Design from content and available space rather than device names alone.
When the application can be measured, use the current Core Web Vitals "good" targets as operational goals:
Do not claim these targets passed without measurement. Distinguish lab observations from field evidence.
Model the states that users can actually encounter. Depending on the feature, cover:
Keep state transitions understandable. Announce meaningful asynchronous changes, prevent duplicate submission, retain recoverable user input, and never show success before the operation succeeds.
Apply this compact rubric before approving a component in React, Next.js, Vite, or another frontend stack:
This skill is written to stay usable across GitHub Copilot, Claude Code, and Codex.
$CODEX_HOME/skills/frontend-design and restart Codex after major changes.Preferred MCP Server: None required
Before claiming the frontend-design workflow succeeded:
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
AI-powered adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector design for gene therapy including capsid engineering, promoter selection, and tropism optimization.
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。
Improve the clarity and voice of AI-assisted academic writing (papers, theses, rebuttals) and
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。
12-agent academic paper writing pipeline. 11 modes (full/plan/outline/revision/revision-coach/abstract/lit-review/format-convert/citation-check/disclosure/rebuttal-audit). 6 paper types, 5 citation formats, bilingual abstracts, LaTeX/DOCX-via-Pandoc/PDF output. Style Calibration + Writing Quality Check + Anti-Patterns with IRON RULE markers. Triggers: write paper, academic paper, guide my paper, parse reviews, audit my rebuttal, check my response draft, AI disclosure, 寫論文, 學術論文, 引導我寫論文, 審查意見, 評估回覆, 논문 작성, 초록 작성, 논문 수정, 논문 계획을 도와줘, 심사 의견 반영, 답변서 점검, AI 사용 고지.
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 writing framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready manuscript. Use when users want to: (1) write a paper from a detailed outline, (2) ensure quality control during writing, (3) maintain consistency across chapters, (4) prepare a submission-ready manuscript, or (5) systematically execute a planned paper. Triggered by phrases like 'write the paper from this outline,' 'compose the full manuscript,' 'execute the outline,' or when users have completed strategic planning (academic-paper-strategist skill) and are ready to write. Takes optimized outline as input; outputs complete manuscript with iterative quality 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。
Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Runs a 5-seat, role-separated review panel (Journal-Fit Reviewer + 3 peer-review roles + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise; role separation is not a claim of independent error processes. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, Socratic guided, and calibration modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review, calibrate reviewer, reviewer calibration, measure reviewer accuracy, 審查論文, 論文審查, 模擬審查, 同儕審查, 幫我審這篇, 以審查人角度評估, 審查者校準, 논문 심사, 동료 심사, 모의 심사, 심사자 관점에서 평가, 심사자 보정.
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 strategic planning framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers targeting preprint platforms (PhilArchive, arXiv, PhilSci-Archive). Use when users want to: (1) plan a paper on a specific topic, (2) identify research gaps and assess originality, (3) develop optimized paper outlines, (4) prepare for preprint submission, or (5) understand platform requirements and writing standards. Triggered by phrases like 'plan a paper on,' 'help me design a paper about,' 'identify research gaps in,' 'is this idea original,' or when users need structured research planning. The skill guides through three phases: Platform Analysis (identifying target venue and studying sample papers), Theoretical Framework (AI-driven literature search and gap identification), and Outline Optimization (structured design with reviewer-perspective self-assessment). Each phase includes quality evaluation standards and validation checkpoints.
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。