「questions」の検索結果

Turns a legal question, a set of draft questions, or source material such as a statute, jury instruction, rubric, contract checklist, or coding manual into a battery of narrow questions that TypeSafe's Jev, a fast classifier that returns probabilities rather than prose, can answer reliably across many documents. The skill breaks conclusions such as negligence, felony murder, or standing into element-level questions, writes the governing rule into each question, and delivers the questions alone, in Jev's request format or in plain English. Built for legal work that asks the same questions of many texts: coding statutes across jurisdictions, coding opinions or case files for empirical research, checking contracts against a review checklist, screening intake narratives, and grading student work against a rubric. Use when asked to write Jev questions, build a classifier for legal documents, or turn a legal test into yes-or-no questions. Running the questions requires Jev access; writing them does 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。

Answer Viking AI Search product questions, CLI usage questions, API/auth questions, configuration questions, and troubleshooting questions by grounding every claim in either the installed `vs` CLI's own output or official Volcengine documentation. Never fabricate.

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 set of questions (form exports, helpdesk logs, meeting Q and A, chat threads, a plain list) plus the source documents the user supplies into a DRAFT FAQ grouped by theme: every answer quoted or paraphrased from a named source with a reference, verbatim quotes for dates, figures, eligibility and obligations, UNKNOWN where the sources are silent, a source register with precedence, a conflicts table and a routing list of unanswered questions to owners. Use when the user asks to "build an FAQ from these documents", "answer these questions from the policy", "turn the Q and A into an FAQ page", "group these questions and answer them from the guide" or "what do our documents say about these questions". Do not use for the manager FAQ of a changed HR policy, use policy-change-briefing instead; for checking whether a document's own claims are evidenced, 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。

Ask Questions If Underspecified workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing 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。

Facilitate a full design-thinking engagement (Empathize, Define, Ideate, Prototype, Test) grounded in real user evidence. Use whenever the user wants to understand users deeply and design a solution for them: "run design thinking", "understand our users", "design user interviews", "synthesize these interview notes", "build personas", "write How-Might-We questions", "prototype this concept", "design a usability test", "our users are churning and we don't know why", in any language ("tư duy thiết kế", "nghiên cứu người dùng", "phỏng vấn khách hàng", "デザイン思考", "设计思维"), even when they never say "design thinking". Also use when the user drops raw interview notes, transcripts, or survey exports and wants insights, personas, or product decisions. Not for "is there a market for X" desk questions (market-researcher).

Systemic and solution-focused methods: miracle question, scaling, exception exploration, circular questions, hypothetical questions, worsening questions, coping questions. Merged from solution-focused-therapy and systemic-questioning.

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。

Prepares the user for a specific interview from their real experience. Builds a story bank in Situation/Task/Action/Result/Reflection form mapped to the competencies the role and company test (such as Amazon's Leadership Principles), writes a cited company and role brief from public sources, predicts questions per round, drafts opener, why-us, weakness and salary answers, prepares questions to ask and a logistics checklist, and runs a post-interview debrief. Use when the user says "help me prepare for my interview", "I have an interview tomorrow" or "in 2 hours", "build my story bank", "STAR stories", "interviewing as a career changer", "what will they ask me", "how do I answer tell me about yourself", "questions to ask the interviewer", "research the company" or "debrief my interview". Uses Reactive Resume MCP tools when connected. For scored role-play practice, mock-interview; for thank-you notes and tracking, job-application-manager; for a salary number, offers or negotiation, offer-negotiation.

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。

Bar prep questions — MBE or essay, targeted at your weak subjects and bar jurisdiction. Tracks misses and comes back to patterns. Use when the user says "bar prep", "MBE questions", "practice essay", or "test me for the bar".

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 educational practice questions from lecture notes to test student understanding. Use when users request practice questions, exam preparation materials, study guides, or assessment items based on lecture content.

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。

PR code review that surfaces decay risks, design smells, and maintainability issues with concrete Symptom → Source → Consequence → Remedy findings, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to review code, check a PR, shares a diff or pastes code asking "does this look right?" / "any issues here?" / "ready to merge?", or asks for feedback on a function, class, or file. Also triggers when user mentions: code smells / refactoring / clean architecture / DDD / SOLID principles / Hyrum's Law / deep modules / tactical programming / conceptual integrity / Brooks's Law / Mythical Man-Month / second system effect. Do NOT trigger for: questions about how to write code from scratch, language syntax questions, or framework/tool questions where no existing code is shared.

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。

Stress-test a decision or claim through a sharp, fair Q&A — the questions a good lawyer or skeptical friend would ask before you commit. Use when asked to cross-examine me, ask me hard questions about this, interrogate my plan, or make me defend this. Produces a sequenced line of probing questions (from clarifying to challenging to the killer question), space to answer, and a debrief on where your answers were strong, evasive, or exposed a gap — so weaknesses surface in private before they surface in public.

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 educational practice questions from lecture notes to test student understanding. Use when users request practice questions, exam preparation materials, study guides, or assessment items based on lecture content.

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。

When you have a decision to make and want a structured workflow that picks the load-bearing questions, walks through them, reaches a call (or "wait"), and archives the rationale for future reference. Based on the 37signals Guide to Making Decisions (38 questions) plus house additions like Q39 opportunity cost ("what does saying yes displace?"). Triages to 6–8 relevant questions per decision instead of forcing the full set. Archives every decision to ~/.config/makerskills/decide/archive/ with a revisit date so you can check later whether the call was right. Triggers on "/decide," "help me decide," "should I [X]," "I need to make a decision about," "stuck on a decision," "deciding between," "go/no-go on," "what should I do about." This is both the decision-making workflow AND the decision log — making the decision is the act of logging 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。

Ask Questions If Underspecified workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing 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。

Ask the minimum clarifying questions before implementation when requirements are ambiguous or missing crucial details

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。

Systemic questioning techniques: Circular questions, scaling questions, miracle question, and exception questions for reflection and perspective expansion.

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 a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Chief Technology Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings cited to the exact passage, technology risks (architecture, build versus buy, vendor lock-in, security of design, engineering capacity), what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CTO review", "pressure-test the technical side of this plan", "what would a CTO ask about this" or "rehearse the technology seat before the review". Do not use for cash, payback or budget questions, use cfo-reviewer instead; for capacity and timeline questions, use coo-reviewer; for security controls, privacy or compliance, use ciso-reviewer. 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。

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Chief Financial Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, finance risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CFO review", "pressure-test the numbers in this business case", "what would a CFO say about this", "challenge the payback and run costs" or "prepare this for the investment committee". Do not use for delivery or capacity questions, use coo-reviewer instead; for architecture or vendor questions, use cto-reviewer; for positioning or demand, use cmo-reviewer. 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。

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Chief Operating Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings cited to specific sections, delivery and operational risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a COO review", "pressure-test the delivery plan", "what would our COO say about this", "check the timeline and capacity" or "find the execution gaps before the steering committee". Do not use for financial questions, use cfo-reviewer instead; for architecture or vendor questions, use cto-reviewer. 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。

Triage a GitHub issue that already has the cc-issue-created label and is assumed ready to start. Inspect the comment history first to decide whether human confirmation is needed (cc-need-human-check, highest priority — reserved for issue-level deadlock, or for confirmation items answer-issue-questions already investigated and explicitly marked unanswerable); otherwise close the issue as not needed, delegate unanswered confirmation items in the last comment or the description to answer-issue-questions (cc-answer-issue-questions), refresh a description stale relative to settled comment-history content (cc-update-issue), or move to execution (cc-exec-issue). Any UI-changing issue is routed to the design-first flow (cc-create-ui-design) before execution; the exceptions are an issue whose description already names the .pen design to implement against, and a minor UI change that introduces no new visual decision (no new screen/section, no layout change, no new reusable component, no visual expression outside existing design tokens/components). Design files are never edited in the implementation PR. Dependency checks are out of scope.

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。

Self-tuning question sensitivity + developer psychographic for gstack (v1: observational). Review which AskUserQuestion prompts fire across gstack skills, set per-question preferences (never-ask / always-ask / ask-only-for-one-way), inspect the dual-track profile (what you declared vs what your behavior suggests), and enable/disable question tuning. Conversational interface — no CLI syntax required. Use when asked to "tune questions", "stop asking me that", "too many questions", "show my profile", "what questions have I been asked", "show my vibe", "developer profile", or "turn off question tuning". (gstack) Proactively suggest when the user says the same gstack question has come up before, or when they explicitly override a recommendation for the Nth time.

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。

仕事や暮らしの繰り返し作業を質問で掘り下げ、開始条件や人の確認、判断用の要約を整理して、実装担当が追加質問なしで作れるワークフロー仕様にするスキル。

• 任せられる繰り返し作業を見つけたいとき
• ワークフローの開始条件を整理したいとき
• 人による確認のタイミングを決めたいとき

計画や設計を練り直したいときに、踏み込んだ質問を重ねるインタビューを行うスキル。考えを具体化するための対話を、関連スキルの呼び出しで始めます。

• 質問を通じて計画を練り直したいとき
• インタビューで設計を検討したいとき
• 対話で初期の案を具体化したいとき