「evidence」の検索結果

Canonical entry point for the full Gaia evidence verification pipeline. Invoke as /evidence-verification-pipeline or /ev-pipeline — both names trigger this skill. Use whenever you need to run the evidence phases end-to-end: collecting raw evidence from the data lake, verifying live GitHub star counts, running Phase 2B benchmark-source verification, running adversarial auditing for noise and URL errors, and checking link health via Firecrawl. Also use when someone says "run the evidence pipeline", "verify the evidence lake", "audit evidence", "run ev-pipeline", "full evidence check", "pipeline run", "prepare evidence for ingestion", or "refresh the data lake". This is the pre-ingestion step — run it before importing any evidence into the registry.

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。

Top-level orchestrator for the Gaia Skill Tree evidence verification pipeline. Run this when you want to do a full evidence pass — collecting raw sources, verifying live GitHub star counts, running Phase 2B benchmark-source verification, adversarially auditing for quality/formatting issues, and checking that every URL is reachable — all in one coordinated sequence. Trigger phrases: "run the evidence pipeline", "full evidence pass", "verify evidence", "evidence verification pipeline", "run ev-pipeline", "check all evidence", "audit the data lake", "evidence quality sweep", "refresh evidence", "validate evidence sources". Also aliased as /evidence-verification-pipeline. Use the individual sub-skills (ev-collection, ev-star-verification, ev-adversarial-audit, ev-link-validation) only when you need to re-run one phase in isolation; for end-to-end work, always start 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。

Use when reviewing Java enterprise evidence for MiFID II investment services, investment activities, client classification, suitability, appropriateness, order-handling evidence, best-execution evidence, algorithmic-trading governance evidence, market-access governance evidence, transaction evidence, record keeping, monitoring, or compliance-owner handoff. This should trigger for requests such as Review a Java investment-service platform for MiFID II evidence; Assess suitability, appropriateness, order-handling evidence, or best-execution evidence; Document audit, monitoring, or clock-synchronisation gaps for algorithmic-trading governance; Assess investment-service engineering evidence before production release. Part of Plinth Toolkit

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。

Guides privacy audit evidence collection processes including evidence planning, sampling strategies, documentation standards, chain of custody, interview techniques, system walkthrough procedures, and evidence evaluation. Covers ISO 19011 evidence categories (records, statements of fact, observations) and ISACA audit evidence requirements for privacy compliance assessments. Keywords: audit evidence, evidence collection, sampling, chain of custody, audit documentation, interview techniques.

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。

Skippable Phase 0 of the Gaia evidence verification pipeline. Use only on declared need for higher-quality Stage-2 evidence: a promotion candidate, or a skill that gaia-meta-sweep flagged as under-evidenced. Given a skill id, source repo/context, and needed evidence types (benchmark-result, arxiv, peer-review, social-signal), it runs Firecrawl searches, scrapes top hits to markdown, and appends discovered sources into Phase 1 inputs. Missing benchmark evidence is recorded as benchmark-source candidates first, not direct scoring rows. Trigger phrases: "discover evidence", "find new evidence", "Phase 0", "run ev-discovery", "search for benchmarks/papers", "under-evidenced", "promotion candidate needs stronger proof". This is the ONLY ev-* skill that searches the web for NEW evidence; other ev-* skills aggregate or verify known sources. Requires Firecrawl to be usable (`firecrawl --status` authenticated OR FIRECRAWL_API_KEY set); skips gracefully when neither holds.

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。

Builds an evidence map for one document, section or contested claim: every factual claim extracted verbatim and numbered, its supporting passage in the supplied sources or UNKNOWN, the strength of that support as evidenced, contradictions between sources, and the specific question or document that would close each gap, returned in the chat as Markdown tables for the author or reviewer. Use when the user asks to "check what this document actually proves", "map the evidence behind these claims", "which of these statements are supported", "build an evidence map", "what would we need to back this up" or "is this claim substantiated". Do not use for requesting evidence of security controls from control owners, use control-evidence-request-pack instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

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。

Turns a control list and an audit scope into draft evidence requests grouped by control owner, each with the control as stated, the audit period, evidence examples (commonly requested) and a proposed due date derived from the fieldwork dates. Never judges whether evidence is sufficient, never selects the sample and never sends a request; the auditor decides. Use when the user asks to "prepare the evidence requests", "draft the PBC list", "build the evidence request pack for the audit" or "what do we need to ask each control owner for". Do not use for document requests and interview questions built from an audit plan, use audit-prep-pack instead; to check claims in a report against sources, use claims-evidence-map. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

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。

QA the omo Senpi adapter (packages/omo-senpi, packages/senpi-task) against the REAL senpi binary in strict isolation, and write every artifact to the one canonical evidence path .omo/evidence/omo-senpi-adapter/<slug>/. The live drivers under packages/omo-senpi/scripts/qa/ create their own isolated SENPI_CODING_AGENT_DIR and ignore the caller's, so the real ~/.senpi/agent is never written. Ships scripts/resolve-evidence-dir.mjs, which is the ONLY sanctioned way to pick an evidence directory: it rejects traversal, separators, absolute paths, and stray roots such as local-ignore/qa-evidence. Use whenever someone changes anything under packages/omo-senpi or packages/senpi-task, or wants to QA, smoke-test, verify, or debug the Senpi adapter, the task/team engine, the DAG, task RPC, or skill delivery. Triggers: senpi qa, qa senpi, senpi-qa, test senpi adapter, verify senpi task, senpi task e2e, senpi team e2e, task dag qa, live senpi driver, senpi evidence path.

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。

Phase 4 of the Gaia evidence verification pipeline. Checks every URL in the evidence data lake for HTTP liveness — catches dead links (404, 403, timeout, connection errors) before evidence is ingested into the registry. Use this skill when running the full /ev-pipeline, asked to "validate links", "check evidence URLs", "run link validation", "find dead links in the data lake", "check HTTP status of evidence sources", or "verify evidence links still work". Wraps validate_sources.py as a temporary coexistence URL-health shim.

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。

Run this skill for Phase 3 of the evidence verification pipeline — the adversarial audit step. Use when you need to check the evidence data lake for bad data before ingestion: dead links, wrong URL formats (tree/ vs blob/), subjective wording ("elite", "high-quality"), stale migration notes, benchmark catalog misuse/vendor-claim leakage, or skills whose star evidence conflicts with classified evidence level. Triggers on phrases like: "audit the data lake", "adversarial check", "ev-adversarial-audit", "check for noise in evidence", "flag bad evidence", "run the audit phase", "quality check the by-type files", or any reference to Phase 3 of the pipeline.

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。

Phase 1 of the Gaia evidence verification pipeline. Use this skill whenever you need to gather, consolidate, or refresh raw evidence for named skills in the registry. Trigger phrases: "collect evidence", "populate the data lake", "gather sources", "run ev-collection", "Phase 1", "compile the evidence index", "refresh the unified lake", "aggregate skill evidence", "build the evidence database". Also invoke as the first step before running ev-star-verification, ev-adversarial-audit, or ev-link-validation — nothing downstream is meaningful without a fresh, compiled index. Covers GitHub repo links, stargazer signals, YouTube showcases, arXiv papers, peer reviews, benchmark results, blog/newsletter posts, and self-attestation artifacts.

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。

医学证据等级排序与编排层 skill - evidence grading orchestrator. 当用户请求"证据等级 / GRADE / 证据排序 / 医学证据评估 / 系统评价排序 / 临床证据排序 / 证据金字塔 / 给 PMID 打分 / Practice Guideline 优先 / Cochrane 优先 / 反向证据交叉验证 / evidence grading / quality of evidence / evidence pyramid / GRADE assessment / Cochrane review ranking / clinical evidence ranking"时,**调用本 skill 进行医学证据自动分级,自动选择最佳信息源**。本 skill 是编排层(L2)·不直接打 NCBI/Europe PMC/ClinicalTrials API,而是编排 6 个底层原子 skill(pubmed-eutils / europepmc-search / clinical-trials-v2 / aact-bulk-trials / bioc-fulltext-fetch / pubtator-entity-search)的召回结果,按证据金字塔(指南 > Meta > RCT > Cohort > Case-Control > Case Report)做 GRADE A/B/C/D 自动评级,自动剔除 editorial/letter/comment。优先使用 BioMCP MCP server 做 fan-out(genomoncology/biomcp);无 BioMCP 时走自建 slow-path 兜底。跨平台无锁(Claude Code / Codex / Gemini CLI)。

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。

Builds and maintains a DRAFT impact log from notes, messages, status updates and completed work: one row per outcome with its evidence and evidence level, date, who benefited and the source it traces to, plus a gap list of outcomes that still lack evidence, structured so a later review, appraisal or promotion case can draw on it. Use when the user asks to "start an impact log", "add this to my impact log", "log what I achieved this quarter", "pull my wins out of these notes", "turn these messages into evidence for my review" or "what do I have evidence for so far". Do not use for a performance rating, ranking, pay or promotion decision, the skill records evidence and never judges it; for the review narrative itself, use performance-review-drafter; for a role profile built from the work, use job-description-drafter instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

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, export, load, and verify forensic evidence from GitHub sources. Use when creating verifiable evidence objects from GitHub API, GH Archive, Wayback Machine, local git repositories, or security vendor reports. Handles evidence storage, querying, and re-verification against original sources.

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。

Analysis of Competing Hypotheses. Operationalizes Richards Heuer's CIA-tradition technique for systematically narrowing among multiple hypotheses against evidence. Builds an explicit hypothesis-vs-evidence matrix and focuses on disconfirmation rather than confirmation — the central insight: hypotheses cannot be proven, only disconfirmed; the surviving hypothesis is the one with the least disconfirming evidence. Spawns parallel hypothesizers (in isolation, across hypothesis-generation angles) and parallel evidence-gatherers (across evidence classes), then synthesizes into a matrix, diagnosticity analysis, sensitivity analysis, and falsification milestones. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.

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 marketing, packaging, web or sustainability text against the environmental-claim rules the user supplies (house policy, regulator guidance extract, industry code) and returns a DRAFT claims review: every environmental claim quoted verbatim with location and family, the evidence the text or evidence pack offers for it with date and scope, the supplied rule passages that bear on each claim, observations as read, and separate question lists for legal and for marketing. No compliance, greenwashing or substantiation verdict. Use when the user asks to "review these green claims", "check this copy against our environmental claims policy", "what evidence do we have for carbon neutral here", "list the sustainability claims in this brochure" or "prepare questions for legal on this eco campaign". Do not use for mapping general factual claims to evidence, use claims-evidence-map instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

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。

diff-time で「影響範囲を repo 全体で調査した証拠」「失敗系を検証した証拠」「外部依存・レート制限・キャッシュ整合を確認した証拠」の欠落を検出する evidence-sufficiency 観点。defect そのものは既存 skill へ委譲し、本 skill は「そのリスク種別を調査した証拠が差分・PR 本文・テストに残っているか」の meta 評価のみを行う。証拠が同一 diff に同梱（テスト・canary・grep 記録）されていれば充足とみなす

Discover, build, verify, and optionally export (HTML, optional PDF) the evidence manifest of one SDD Composy task in evidence_required, routing it toward review_required. Use when acceptance evidence must be assembled or checked — 'juntar as evidências da task', 'gerar o relatório de evidências', 'verify the evidence manifest'. Do NOT use to run tests (sdd-qa), review code (sdd-review), or inspect the trace (sdd-trace).

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。

OpenClawの機能分類とQAの証拠を照合し、品質・機能の充足度・長期サポートの評価を見直して、成熟度のスコアカード文書を更新するスキルです。

• 機能領域ごとの成熟度を見直したいとき
• 想定した利用手順の充足度を確認したいとき
• QAの証拠から評価文書を更新したいとき

競合のブランド表現やサービス、実績などを共通の基準で採点し、根拠付きの比較カードと戦略上の二軸図にまとめ、自社が狙う位置の競合を把握するスキル。

• 共通基準で競合を比較したいとき
• 根拠付きの競合カード作成
• 二つの戦略目標で競合を整理したいとき

Strategy Discovery: evidence-gated facade over Alpha Zoo + the SDM strategy store — answers what strategies exist and what state they are in, with per-regime evidence instead of scenario tags; reports evidence freshness on every returned row and rebuilds the disposable evidence cache from local backtest runs.

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。

Collect volatile forensic evidence from a compromised host by following the order of volatility, preserving memory, network connections, running processes, and system state with documented chain of custody before they are lost. Use before isolating, shutting down, or remediating a compromised host, especially when fileless or memory-resident malware is suspected, root cause analysis is needed, or the evidence must hold up in legal proceedings.

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。

Upload one Kleros-ecosystem file per paid request to IPFS through the Kleros x402 gateway for $0.01 USDC on Base mainnet. Use for dispute evidence, MetaEvidence JSON, court/dispute/arbitrator policies, Curate item metadata, juror justifications, or any artifact a Kleros contract or subgraph will reference by CID. Trigger when the request mentions Kleros, court, arbitrator, dispute, juror, Curate, Proof of Humanity, evidence, meta-evidence, justification, explicitly names this gateway or skill, or asks to test or validate it. Do NOT use for generic IPFS/CID requests without Kleros context; recommend a general-purpose pinning service. Each request accepts exactly one file: different bytes require separate paid uploads, while identical bytes should reuse one CID.

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。

Unified biological database evidence owner. Use for gene annotation, variant clinical significance, cancer mutation evidence, GWAS trait associations, pathway mapping, target-disease evidence, protein structures, protein interaction networks, reference single-cell census queries, and cross-database biological ID mapping. Do not use for full single-cell analysis, bulk RNA-seq differential expression, BAM/VCF processing, protein embedding models, metabolic flux modeling, genomic interval ML, or flow-cytometry file parsing.

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。