「argument」の検索結果

Use when writing MATLAB functions with arguments blocks — repeating arguments (arguments (Repeating)), .?ClassName property import in constructors, name-value forwarding with namedargs2cell, or migrating from inputParser or validateattributes. Also when reviewing signatures for implicit-conversion pitfalls (size reshaping, class coercion, computed defaults), or when restricting, constraining, or validating function inputs — scalar vs vector enforcement, type rejection, size checking. Also when asked to harden inputs, make a function more robust, tighten input checking, or rewrite for safer input acceptance — even without "validation" or "arguments block" wording. Triggers on: arguments block, mustBe validators, name-value arguments, varargin, inputParser, nargin/narginchk, restrict input, type checking, scalar constraint, harden inputs, defensive programming. Not for: App Designer callbacks, Simulink mask parameters, class inheritance, or runtime validation outside function or property declarations.

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。

Practical argument analysis and construction -- how to identify, evaluate, reconstruct, and build real arguments in natural language. Covers argument identification (premises, conclusions, intermediate steps), charity and steel-manning, argument mapping, the distinction between deductive validity and inductive strength, burden of proof, and the rhetorical context in which arguments operate. Use when the goal is to engage with real-world argument rather than to formalize it.

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。

Construct well-structured arguments using the hypothesis-argument-example triad. Covers formulating falsifiable hypotheses, building logical arguments (deductive, inductive, analogical, evidential), providing concrete examples, and steelmanning counterarguments. Use when writing or reviewing PR descriptions that propose technical changes, justifying design decisions in ADRs, constructing substantive code review feedback, or building a research argument or technical proposal.

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。

Act as experienced opposing counsel to attack, undermine, and expose weaknesses in a legal argument, submission, witness statement, or structured reasoning. Produces a six-part adversarial analysis: 1. A core theory of attack identifying the single most effective way to defeat the argument; 2. A reconstructed version of the opposing argument stripped of rhetoric to expose its fragility; 3. Primary lines of attack grouped by category (legal misstatement, evidential gaps, causation failures, internal inconsistency, over-reliance on assertion, procedural weakness); 4. An "if I were the judge" section showing how a sceptical tribunal would dismantle the argument; 5. Surgical strikes - 3 to 5 high-impact points ready for oral submissions; and 6. An analysis of what the argument is trying to hide. Written in formal, adversarial British English for a legally trained audience.

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。

Prepare a lawyer for an adversarial proceeding the way Neal Katyal's "Harvey" prepared him for the SCOTUS tariffs argument: profile the tribunal from their prior opinions and questions, predict the specific questions you will face, map narrow "escape routes" each judge can walk through without abandoning prior commitments, and spar adversarially until only the strongest answers survive. The model is the sparring partner. The human still wins the case. Use when: preparing for oral argument, appellate argument, motion hearing, evidentiary hearing, deposition (taking or defending), arbitration, mediation, or any proceeding where a known decision-maker will fire questions at you in real time. Also useful for stress-testing a brief before filing. Proactively suggest when: the user mentions an upcoming hearing/argument with named judges or arbitrators, drafts a brief and wants it pressure-tested, asks "what will Justice X / Judge Y ask me," or talks about preparing for a specific bench.

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 argument structure scaffolds using Toulmin, PEEL, or CER frameworks for a specific claim or question. Use when teaching argumentative or analytical writing across any subject.

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 argument structure scaffolds using Toulmin, PEEL, or CER frameworks for a specific claim or question. Use when teaching argumentative or analytical writing across any subject.

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。

Historical argumentation, evidence-based writing, and oral history methods. Covers thesis development for historical arguments, evidence selection and deployment, counterargument construction and rebuttal, historical writing conventions, and the methodology of oral history as both source and practice. Use when constructing historical arguments, writing analytical essays, conducting oral history interviews, or assessing the quality of historical 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。

Systematic evaluation of arguments for structure, validity, soundness, and charitable interpretation. Covers premise identification, conclusion extraction, argument mapping, steel-manning, and the distinction between validity (form) and soundness (form plus true premises). Use when assessing an argument, reconstructing an opponent's position fairly, or preparing a rebuttal.

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。

Analiza textos aplicando pensamiento crítico — el marco de los 8 elementos del pensamiento y los estándares intelectuales universales de Richard Paul y Linda Elder — y detecta las falacias lógicas graves presentes. Úsala siempre que el usuario comparta un texto (pegado o en un archivo) y pida analizarlo críticamente, detectar falacias, evaluar argumentos, identificar sesgos, o preguntas como "¿qué problemas tiene este argumento?", "¿es sólido este razonamiento?", "analiza esto", "dame una crítica". También actívala cuando el usuario comparta un artículo de opinión, un post, un discurso, un ensayo o cualquier texto argumentativo y quiera evaluar su calidad argumentativa.

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。

Structure persuasive speeches and formal arguments in forensic, legal, policy, and competitive debate styles. Use when the user needs to prepare talks, opening or closing arguments, policy pitches, public explanations, debate speeches, or mentions 'forensic speech', 'formal argument', 'persuasive speech structure', 'debate speech', 'opening statement', 'closing argument'. Turns structured claims into audience-tuned persuasive delivery.

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。

Structure persuasive speeches and formal arguments in forensic, legal, policy, and competitive debate styles. Use when the user needs to prepare talks, opening or closing arguments, policy pitches, public explanations, debate speeches, or mentions 'forensic speech', 'formal argument', 'persuasive speech structure', 'debate speech', 'opening statement', 'closing argument'. Turns structured claims into audience-tuned persuasive delivery.

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。

Track the full Toulmin epistemic ancestry of every claim produced by a multi-agent swarm. Each agent output is tagged with an argument chain (claim / data / warrant / relationship) derived from SwarmTracer spans and LineageEdge records, so operators can zoom into any sub-claim and see precisely which agents asserted it, what triggered each assertion, and how contradictions propagated or were synthesised away. The SwarmTracer pattern — wrapping the SwarmAgentExecutor to capture spans, record messages, and build a lineage graph — is the concrete runtime substrate. Argumentative lineage lifts that graph into the Toulmin vocabulary so reasoning provenance is both machine-queryable and human-interpretable.

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 building the conceptual/theoretical argument of an American Anthropologist (AA) manuscript into a four-field contribution — whether the work is ethnographic, archaeological, biological, or linguistic. AA rewards a portable concept and reflexive argument over a bare finding or thick description alone. Structures the argument; it does not run analyses or write fieldnotes.

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 Swift API Design Guidelines to name, label, and document Swift APIs. Covers argument label rules (prepositional phrase rule, grammatical phrase rule, first-label omission), mutating/nonmutating pair naming (-ed/-ing participle pattern, form- prefix, sort/sorted, formUnion/union), side-effect naming (noun for pure, verb for mutating), documentation comment structure (summary by declaration kind, O(1) complexity rule), clarity at call site, role-based naming, protocol naming (-able/-ible/-ing), default arguments over method families, casing conventions, and terminology. Use when designing new Swift APIs, reviewing naming and argument labels, writing documentation comments, or refactoring for call site clarity.

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。

Assesses a legal argument, submission, or piece of structured reasoning from the perspective of a judge reading it cold under time pressure. Produces a structured seven-part assessment: what the case appears to be about, immediate points of confusion, what feels strong, what feels weak, what is assumed but unproved, a provisional confidence level (low/medium/high), and what would be needed to persuade. The skill does not rewrite, improve, or attack the argument — it tells you how it actually lands on a sceptical, experienced reader with no prior context. Works on skeleton arguments, witness statements, letters before action, position statements, academic articles, and non-legal structured reasoning.

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。

影视编剧 (Scriptwriting / Screenwriting) — 为电影 / 电视 / 流媒体剧集写戏剧蓝本的从业者认知操作系统: 决定「讲什么故事、人物是谁为何转变、场景如何被戏剧化、主题为何重要」的学科 —— 区别于导演 (调度 / 视觉实现)、制片 (融资 / 排期)、小说 (无格式 / 场景 / 视觉动作约束)。覆盖 (a) 故事与结构理论 (亚里士多德《诗学》情节 / 人物 / 思想 + 突转 peripeteia / 发现 anagnorisis + 净化 catharsis; Syd Field 范式 / 三幕 / 情节点; Freytag 金字塔; Egri 前提; McKee《故事》掌控性理念 / 鸿沟 / 价值正负转变 / 激励事件 / 渐进式复杂化; Truby《故事剖析》22 步 + 道德论证; Vogler/Campbell 英雄之旅; Blake Snyder《救猫咪》15 拍节拍表; Dan Harmon 故事环; John Yorke 五幕《进入森林》; Frank Daniel 八序列法; 起承转合东亚戏剧结构), (b) 人物 (想要 vs 需要 / 外在目标 vs 内在缺失, 人物弧光 正 / 负 / 平, flaw-wound-ghost 创伤背景, 主动 vs 被动主角的能动性, Egri 三维人物 生理 / 社会 / 心理, 反派是主角的镜子, 群像与关系网, 人物在压力下的选择中显形), (c) 对白 (潜台词 subtext, 对白即动作与冲突而非信息, 避免太直白 on the nose, 人物独特声口, 信息植入 exposition, Mamet/Sorkin 意图-阻碍式对白, 展示而非告知, 中文剧台词工艺), (d) 场景与序列工艺 (场景是有目标 / 冲突 / 转折的微型故事, 场景价值充能与转折点, 晚进早出, 八序列法, set piece, 转场, 场景头 / 动作行 / 括号提示 格式工艺), (e) 主题与前提 (掌控性理念 / 前提, 主题是被戏剧化的论证而非说教, 道德论证 Truby, 主题统一性, 这到底在讲什么), (f) 类型 (类型惯例是对观众的承诺, Snyder 10 类故事, 颠覆 vs 尊重套路, 类型片 vs 文艺片, 中国类型 主旋律 / 古装 / 年代 / 悬疑 / 甜宠 / 都市 / 军旅 / 历史正剧), (g) 格式与工业流程 (好莱坞剧本格式与 Final Draft, logline 一句话故事, treatment 故事大纲, 节拍表, 分场 / 分集大纲, spec 原创剧本 vs 委托, pitch, coverage, 美剧编剧室与 showrunner 制; 中国 大纲→人物小传→分集大纲→剧本, 长剧集 40 集结构, 网络电影 / 网大, 分账剧, 平台定制剧, 微短剧竖屏短剧), (h) 改稿与开发 (写作就是改写, 改稿 / 润色 / 推倒重写, 处理意见 / 改稿意见, 片方与平台 notes, 杀死你的宝贝, 围读, 开发地狱), (i) 改编 (IP改编 小说 / 漫画 / 游戏改编, 忠于精神而非字句, 压缩, 中国网文 IP 热), (j) 中国影视编剧产业现实 (审查 / 广电总局约束, 备案 / 立项, 平台定制剧 爱优腾芒, 分账, 编剧维权 署名权 / 欠薪 / 枪手, 注水剧, 流量 + 大IP 资本逻辑 vs 原创工艺, 导演中心制 vs 编剧话语权), (k) 编剧职业与工艺生涯 (spec vs 委托, 编剧 vs 编审 / 策划, 单兵 vs 编剧室, 在开发链条中的位置, WGA 与署名仲裁规范, 入行, 中国编剧地位与权益)。跨 电影 / 美剧流媒体 / 中国电影与长剧集。不含 导演 / 摄影 / 制片 / 融资 / 表演 / 电影理论批评为终点 / 泛小说写作 / 纪录片 / 新闻 —— 本 skill 是「戏剧化编剧」工艺: 故事 / 人物 / 场景 / 对白 / 主题 / 结构 / 格式 与围绕它们的产业流程。 (Scriptwriting / Screenwriting for film & TV (影视编剧) — the cognitive operating system of practitioners who write the dramatic blueprint of films, television, and streaming series: the discipline of deciding WHAT story is told, WHO the characters are and why they change, HOW the scenes are dramatized, and WHY it matters thematically — distinct from directing (staging/visual realization), producing (financing/scheduling), and prose fiction (which has no format/scene/visual-action constraints). Covers (a) story & structure theory (Aristotle's Poetics — plot/character/thought + reversal peripeteia/recognition anagnorisis + catharsis; Syd Field's paradigm/three-act/plot points; Freytag's pyramid; Lajos Egri's premise; Robert McKee's Story — controlling idea/the gap/value charge/inciting incident/progressive complications; John Truby's 22 steps & moral argument; Christopher Vogler/Joseph Campbell hero's journey; Blake Snyder's Save the Cat 15-beat sheet; Dan Harmon's story circle; John Yorke's 5-act Into the Woods; Frank Daniel's 8-sequence method; 起承转合 East-Asian dramatic structure), (b) character (want vs need/external goal vs internal lack, character arc positive/negative/flat, 人物弧光, flaw-wound-ghost backstory, agency active vs passive protagonist, Egri's 3-dimensional character physiology/sociology/psychology, antagonist as the protagonist's mirror, ensemble & relationship webs, character revealed through choice under pressure), (c) dialogue (subtext 潜台词, dialogue as action & conflict not information, 'on the nose' avoidance, distinct character voice, exposition handling, Mamet/Sorkin intention-obstacle dialogue, show-don't-tell, 台词 craft in Chinese drama), (d) scene & sequence craft (scene as a mini-story with goal/conflict/turn, scene value charge & turning point, enter-late-leave-early, the 8-sequence method, set pieces, transitions, slug line/action line/parenthetical format craft), (e) theme & premise (controlling idea/premise/前提, theme as dramatized argument not message, moral argument Truby, thematic unity, 'what is this really about'), (f) genre (genre conventions as audience promise, Snyder's 10 story types, subverting vs honoring tropes, 类型片 vs 文艺片, Chinese genres 主旋律/古装/年代/悬疑/甜宠/都市/军旅/历史正剧), (g) format & industry process (Holly

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。

Test harness for Claude Code skill argument substitution — demonstrates capture-block pre-declaration, XML tag referencing, unintentional variable corruption in code blocks, and correct placement of shell examples in reference files. Use when verifying substitution behavior before applying a pattern to other skills, testing how arguments flow from skill invocations, or understanding the pre-declaration and reference file pattern with greet/farewell/inspect actions.

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。

対話型CLIやSSH、開発用プロセスを新しいターミナルで開くために、実行内容と引数を保った起動計画を作り、対応環境の検出や復旧手順も扱うスキル。

• 対話型CLIを別ウィンドウで開きたいとき
• SSH接続や開発プロセスの起動
• 起動せずに実行計画を確認したいとき

This skill should be used when the user asks to "create a slash command", "add a command", "write a custom command", "define command arguments", "use command frontmatter", "organize commands", "create command with file references", "interactive command", "use AskUserQuestion in command", or needs guidance on slash command structure, YAML frontmatter fields, dynamic arguments, bash execution in commands, user interaction patterns, or command development best practices for Claude 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。

This skill should be used when the user asks to "create a slash command", "add a command", "write a custom command", "define command arguments", "use command frontmatter", "organize commands", "create command with file references", "interactive command", "use AskUserQuestion in command", or needs guidance on slash command structure, YAML frontmatter fields, dynamic arguments, bash execution in commands, user interaction patterns, or command development best practices for Claude 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。

Two-thread adversarial review: a fresh reviewer constructs the strongest 200-word rejection memo, then a second fresh reviewer defends the paper point-by-point and surfaces still-unresolved critical issues. Use when user says "kill argument", "adversarial review", "hostile review", "rebuttal preparation", "reviewer-2 simulation", or before submitting a theory paper that has already passed standard review rounds.

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。

Draft a brief section in house style, consistent with the case theory — every fact cited, every case checked, every argument tied to the theory. Use when the user says "draft the [section]", "write the statement of facts", "argument section on [issue]", or needs a first draft of a brief section.

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。

This skill should be used when the user asks to "create a slash command", "add a command", "write a custom command", "define command arguments", "use command frontmatter", "organize commands", "create command with file references", "interactive command", "use AskUserQuestion in command", or needs guidance on slash command structure, YAML frontmatter fields, dynamic arguments, bash execution in commands, user interaction patterns, or command development best practices for Claude 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。