jp-grants
Skill4 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Collect and answer questions about Japanese subsidies/grants (補助金・助成金) with up-to-date sources. Use when a user asks: which programs they qualify for, eligibility, deadlines, required documents, application steps, or where to find official calls for proposals and past award/adoption examples (e.g. J-Grants, METI/SME Agency, MHLW, prefectures/municipalities). Includes workflows and scripts for web search + structured extraction with citations. This skill is methodology-focused rather than program-specific: it provides reusable ways to discover and verify official information across many programs.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. About 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈12
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 19
Prefer general discovery/extraction patterns that work across ministries, prefectures, and municipalities.
- Distinctive: line 20
Add program-specific handling only when it reflects a common official pattern that is likely to recur.
- Distinctive: line 24
Do not build or maintain one-off scrapers for each individual subsidy program.
- Distinctive: line 25
Do not treat consultant sites, rewritten summaries, or private databases as authoritative sources.
- Distinctive: line 26
Do not infer individual accepted cases from summary statistics when the official source does not publish them.
- Distinctive: line 30
Avoid hallucinating program details.
- Distinctive: line 36
Do not provide legal/tax advice.
- Distinctive: line 40
If the user question is underspecified, ask for only the 3-6 items that most affect eligibility:
- Distinctive: line 49
If the user refuses details, proceed with generic national programs and give a checklist to narrow down.
- Distinctive: line 73
Avoid: consultant blogs as an authority (may be outdated).
- Distinctive: line 100
If official sources publish only statistics, state that individual cases are not publicly available in the checked source
- Distinctive: line 115
Keep the list short. If there are many, offer a second pass after the user answers 1-2 narrowing questions.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
jp-grants - Japan Subsidies / Grants (補助金・助成金)
Operate with a "freshness first" mindset: deadlines and rules change frequently. Prefer official sources (e.g. *.go.jp, *.lg.jp, jgrants-portal.go.jp). Always provide URLs and, when possible, short supporting quotes. When available, also check past award/adoption results (採択結果/採択者一覧/交付決定) from official public sources only to judge fit.
Scope
- This skill is for reusable research workflow, not for maintaining a custom script per subsidy program.
- Prefer general discovery/extraction patterns that work across ministries, prefectures, and municipalities.
- Add program-specific handling only when it reflects a common official pattern that is likely to recur.
Non-goals
- Do not build or maintain one-off scrapers for each individual subsidy program.
- Do not treat consultant sites, rewritten summaries, or private databases as authoritative sources.
- Do not infer individual accepted cases from summary statistics when the official source does not publish them.
Operating rules
- Avoid hallucinating program details. If a field is unknown, say so and provide the official URL to verify.
- For past award/adoption examples, use only official public sources. Do not rely on consultant summaries, media rewrites, or private databases.
- Distinguish clearly between:
- Subsidies/grants (補助金)
- Employment-related support / allowances (助成金, often MHLW)
- Loans/financing (融資) and tax incentives (税制) (not grants)
- Do not provide legal/tax advice; provide procedural guidance and point to official documents.
Minimal intake (ask only if needed)
If the user question is underspecified, ask for only the 3-6 items that most affect eligibility:
- Applicant type: individual / sole proprietor / SME corporation / NPO / school / other
- Location: prefecture + city/ward (local programs are common)
- Purpose: equipment (capex) / IT & DX / hiring & wages / R&D / export / energy saving / disaster recovery / other
- Company size: employees, capital, sales (rough ranges are fine)
- Timeline: when they want to apply / start the project
- Industry constraints: manufacturing / retail / services / construction / healthcare / etc.
If the user refuses details, proceed with generic national programs and give a checklist to narrow down.
Workflow: answer a user question
- Restate constraints + assumptions (explicitly).
- Collect candidate programs from official sources.
- Choose the branch that matches the user need:
- current program details -> find current official call pages and extract rules
- award-result statistics -> find official result announcements and extract counts/breakdowns
- individual accepted cases -> find official
採択者一覧,交付決定一覧, or case-study pages/PDFs
- Extract structured details for the chosen branch.
- Shortlist 3-7 best fits; explain fit and disqualifiers using both current rules and past examples when available.
- Provide next steps: what to read, what documents to prepare, and where to apply.
Source strategy
- Primary: official government and local government sites
*.go.jp(METI, MHLW, SME Agency, etc.)*.lg.jp(prefecture/municipality)jgrants-portal.go.jp(J-Grants)
- Also look for official result pages/PDFs using terms such as
採択結果,採択者一覧,採択事例,交付決定. - For award-result checks, prioritize
chusho.meti.go.jp,meti.go.jp, and*.lg.jpbefore J-Grants. - Secondary: public support organizations (confirm against primary)
- J-Net21, chambers of commerce, SME support centers
- Avoid: consultant blogs as an authority (may be outdated).
- For past award/adoption checks, do not use secondary or executing secretariat sites unless they are themselves the official public publisher for that result document.
- Note:
jgrants-portal.go.jp/robots.txtcurrently disallows almost all crawling (Disallow: /,Allow: /index.html), so search/discovery may be incomplete there.
For a curated list of sources and query templates, read jp-grants/references/sources.md.
Scripts (optional but recommended)
These scripts use Firecrawl for web search + structured extraction, plus a direct official fallback for award-result discovery.
- Find candidate pages:
jp-grants/scripts/find_candidates.py - Find + extract official award-result pages in one step:
jp-grants/scripts/extract_official_award_results.py - Extract official award-result fields:
jp-grants/scripts/extract_award_results.py - Extract individual official award cases:
jp-grants/scripts/extract_case_examples.py - Extract program fields:
jp-grants/scripts/extract_programs.py
find_candidates.py flags:
--include-local: include local government sites (site:lg.jp)--include-executing-sites: include common executing secretariat sites (discovery only)--include-award-results: also search for past award/adoption result pages and PDFs
Practical decision tree
- Need current eligibility/deadlines/required docs -> use
find_candidates.py, thenextract_programs.py - Need official result counts/breakdowns -> use
extract_official_award_results.py - Need individual accepted organizations/projects -> use official public
採択者一覧/交付決定一覧/ case-study pages, thenextract_case_examples.py - If official sources publish only statistics, state that individual cases are not publicly available in the checked source
Output pattern (what to return to the user)
Provide a short list of candidates with consistent fields:
- Program name + administering body
- What it funds (eligible costs)
- Amount/rate (if specified)
- Key eligibility constraints
- Application window / deadline (with "as-of" date)
- Official URL (required)
- Past award/adoption examples from official public sources (if found) and what they imply about fit
- Why it fits / why it might not
Keep the list short. If there are many, offer a second pass after the user answers 1-2 narrowing questions.
In this repository25 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- greats-soul-archive-contributor/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- agentic-cli-designSkill
- ai-chat-frontendSkill
- autoresearch-agentSkill
- brainstorm-frameworksSkill
- business-planningSkill
- clawdbot-configSkill
- dashboard-design-guidebookSkill
- fermi-estimationSkill
- firecrawlSkill
- gogcliSkill
- greats-soul-archive-contributorSkill
- openclaw-agent-creatorSkill
- opencode-agent-creatorSkill
- opencode-command-creatorSkill
- openspec-brownfield-baselineSkill
- oss-publishSkill
- product-improvement-proposalSkill
- python-uv-projectSkill
- rust-cliSkill
- slack-rsSkill
- unit-test-hygieneSkill
- wt-setupSkill
- youtube-summarizerSkill
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

