UI/UX、ロゴ、スライド、画像生成（7,503 件）
概要と使いどころ
Load for footer settings, templates, social/legal links, copyright, tenant customization, instance governance locks, footer HAL capabilities, or footer admin UI/API changes; not for generic page layout footers.
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。
Load when creating, editing, or debugging Lottie/Bodymovin JSON for the local Skia Skottie player: logo/type/SVG animation, loaders, icons, UI microinteractions, lower thirds, charts, diagrams, scene motion, effects, slots, or controls; not for static raster/SVG, CSS-only motion, or video editing.
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。
Load for authentication or authorization changes involving BFF cookies/tokens, JWT validation, claims/user ID extraction, policies, handler access checks, impersonation, or 401/403 bugs; not for UI affordance gating alone.
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。
Load for Blazor/MudBlazor component or page changes involving render modes, dialogs, parameters/events, HAL-gated actions, generated API clients or generated record consumption, theming, or component tests; add accessibility or CSS-isolation only when touched.
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。
Create a new App Store Connect app record via browser automation. Use when there is no public API for app creation and you need an agent to drive the New App form.
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。
Orchestrate iOS screenshot automation with xcodebuild/simctl for build-run, AXe for UI actions, JSON settings and plan files, Koubou-based framing (`asc screenshots frame`), and screenshot upload (`asc screenshots upload`). Use when users ask for automated screenshot capture, AXe-driven simulator flows, frame composition, or screenshot-to-upload pipelines.
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。
Throwaway design probe for logic, state models, UI variations, and affordances before production work. Use when the user wants to prototype, sanity-check a model, make something playable, compare UI directions, or explore a design before ln-spec/ln-plan/ln-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。
Review someone else's PR through an architectural/strategic lens — does it shift design, raise complexity, or quietly change precedent? Drives a brief reflective discussion with the user, then posts a concise review comment via `gh`. Defers line-level and bug-hunting concerns to AI review bots and the PR author.
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。
Explore radically different module shapes before committing to one. Use when choosing an API surface, deciding what a module hides vs exposes, or when the user says 'design it twice'.
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。
Collapse meaningful ambiguity with contrastive examples. Use when a plan/design has several plausible meanings, requirements feel vague, examples would clarify intent faster than grilling, or the user asks to disambiguate, find ambiguity, use behavioral kernels, or ask contrastive questions.
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。
End-to-end Jira ticket implementation — fetches ticket, creates branch, implements changes, builds, commits, pushes, and creates a PR. Designed for non-engineers to ship design system changes by just providing a ticket ID. Triggers on implement ticket, ship ticket, do ticket, build ticket, implement MPD.
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。
Signpost (not a knowledge pack) for the systems-engineering standards landscape — ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288, 24748, 29148, 42010, 15026, 24765; INCOSE SE Handbook & Vision 2035; OMG SysML; SAE/EIA 1001/649/748; ECSS space standards; NATO AAP-48; CMMI; NIST SP 800-160; and more. Contains NO source content: it lists each standard's designation, title, purpose, owning SDO, whether it's redistributable, and where to get it. Use when you need to identify or locate an SE standard — most are paywalled/all-rights-reserved and cannot be packaged, so this points you to the owner (and to the open packs where one exists).
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。
Signpost (not a knowledge pack) for the automotive standards landscape: ISO 26262, ASPICE, SAE J3016, UNECE R155, UNECE R156, and the NHTSA vehicle set. Contains NO source content: designation, edition, owner, status, and an official catalogue URL only. Use when you need to identify or locate an automotive standard. Most are paywalled or carry no redistribution grant and cannot be packaged; the one open path is the nhtsa-vehicle pack.
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。
Signpost (not a knowledge pack) for the functional safety standards landscape: IEC 61508, ISO 26262, ISO/SAE 21434, UL 4600, SAE J3016, and ASPICE. Contains NO source content: designation, edition, owner, status, and an official catalogue URL only. Use when you need to identify or locate a functional safety standard. All six are paywalled or carry no redistribution grant and cannot be packaged; open paths point at US Government packs, which are not equivalents.
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。
Knowledge base from FAA-STD-025f (Preparation of Interface Documentation). Use for IRD/ICD family definitions, common format and content, IRD shall-requirements, ICD design characteristics, verification/VRTM, and CM/revision/approval of FAA Enterprise Subsystem interfaces. Covers rev F preparation rules only; does not replace FAA-STD-005 drawing/spec prep, Order 1800.66 full CM procedures, or non-FAA interface standards.
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。
Knowledge base from the NASA Fault Management Handbook (NASA-HDBK-1002, Draft 2, April 2012). Use for the systems-engineering discipline of designing what a system does when it fails — the fault/failure/anomaly vocabulary, the five FM strategies (two prevention strategies — design-time fault avoidance and operational failure avoidance — plus three tolerance strategies — failure masking, failure recovery, and goal change), the six FM process activities across NASA mission phases Pre-A to E, response-latency-versus-time-to-criticality (TTC) design trades, fault/failure containment regions and FEPPs, the four redundancy approaches, top-down FM requirements development, FM verification vs. validation, the seven dedicated FM milestone reviews (FMCR/FMARR/FMPDR/FMCDR/FMTRR/FMLRR/FMCERR), FM organizational structure, and mined NASA Lessons Learned. Space-mission oriented (flight/ground/operations); spacecraft examples throughout. IMPORTANT: built from an UNAPPROVED DRAFT — several sections (detailed architecture building blocks, the Assessment & Analysis guidance, and Operations & Maintenance) are placeholders in the source and are thin here. Thin on detailed FDIR algorithms, terrestrial/IT fault management, and any approved-standard terminology that may have changed since Draft 2.
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。
Ideenschürf-Workflow für festgefahrene, schwere Probleme (Beweise, Forschungsfragen, hartnäckige Design-/Architekturprobleme): einen Ideenspeicher über acht Schürftechniken füllen (Wiedererkennung, Fern-Disziplin-Analogie, Alltags-Allegorie, Störgefühl/Ästhetik, Märchen-Reframing, Web-/Literatur-Recherche, Geschwisterprojekte, Bestandsquerlauf), dann gegen bereits Versuchtes filtern, eine Idee wählen und bis zur Substanz verfolgen. Nutze diesen Skill, wenn ein Problem trotz mehrerer Anläufe feststeckt, wenn „neue Ideen für X" gebraucht werden, bei „wir drehen uns im Kreis", oder für periodische Innovations-Läufe über ein Projekt. Für breites, freies Ideensammeln ohne festgefahrenes Problem stattdessen brainstorm (SCAMPER, Six Hats etc.).
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。
Anti-slop frontend skill for landing pages, portfolios, and redesigns. The agent reads the brief, infers the right design direction, and ships interfaces that do not look templated. Real design systems when applicable, audit-first on redesigns, strict pre-flight check.
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。
How game development works as a process — roles, subtasks, workflows and role descriptions, especially (but not only) for Roblox. Use this skill when it's about the ORGANIZATION of game dev rather than concrete code: Which roles exist (Creative Director, Engineer, Artist, Polish/Audio, Business, QA-Tester, Game Critic)? Who does which subtask? What does a development chain (concept → backend → frontend → polish → test) look like? How do you write a Game Design Document / KONZEPT.md? How do several (AI) agents divide up a game? Also trigger on "plan a new game", "create Game Design Document", "which roles do I need for my game", "development workflow for a game", "who tests the game", "structure a game idea", "Roblox genre/monetization".
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 a slide-by-slide presentation draft on the user's own slide template and checks every slide against written brand rules (colours with hex codes, fonts, logo placement, slide archetypes, tone, banned visuals), returning the approved outline, the DRAFT deck content and a compliance report as Markdown. Use when the user asks to "build this deck on our template", "make these slides on-brand", "check this presentation against our brand guidelines", "rebuild these slides to corporate identity (CI)" or asks for a CI-compliant or corporate-template presentation. Do not use for an accessibility review of slides, use document-accessibility-check 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 one decision discussion (meeting transcript, chat thread, email chain or notes) into a DRAFT one-page decision memo: the decision as stated, status, options considered, evidence cited, dissent recorded verbatim, owner, effective date and review date, with UNKNOWN for anything the discussion did not settle. Use when the user asks to "write up the decision", "record what we decided", "capture the decision from this thread", "draft the decision memo" or "add this to the decision log". Do not use for full minutes or action items, use transcript-to-actions instead; for a technical design decision, use architecture-decision-record; for a paper seeking a decision not yet taken, use board-paper-skeleton. 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。
Drafts an architecture or design decision record (ADR) from the discussion notes, design review minutes, chat threads and diagram descriptions the user provides: context, decision drivers, options considered with arguments as stated, the decision as the group worded it, consequences and a review date, with every factual claim tagged evidenced, asserted or UNKNOWN so unsupported claims are marked for the author to substantiate. Use when the user asks to "write an ADR", "document the architecture decision", "record why we chose this design", "turn these design review notes into a decision record" or "draft the design decision log entry". Do not use for a business or governance decision with no technical design, use decision-memo-builder instead; for the change ticket that implements the decision, use change-request-pack. 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。
Builds a DRAFT interface register between disciplines or parties from meeting notes, action lists and drawings or document lists: one row per interface with the requesting and providing party, the information needed, the related document number, the need-by date with its source, the status as minuted and a quoted source, plus UNKNOWN and questions where the notes are silent. Never sets a date, rates priority, assigns ownership beyond what the notes state or closes an interface. Use when the user asks to "build an interface register from these minutes", "list the interfaces between piping and civil", "who owes what to whom on this package", "update the interface register from this week's meeting" or "turn these action items into an interface list". Do not use for recording a design or document change raised in a meeting, use management-of-change-intake 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。
Checks an extracted PFD register as a process model and returns findings and unknowns only: connectivity closure, stream numbering, presence of design conditions, equipment duty text, phase and service labels, package and off-sheet scope, boundaries, operating cases, and agreement between the drawing and attached process documents, then holds at gate G2. Creates no design values. Use when the user asks to "check the process model", "verify connectivity" or "is the PFD ready for enrichment" after gate G1 and before enrichment. Do not use for extraction from the drawing, use pfd-intake-and-extraction instead; do not use to propose lines or instruments, use piping-enrichment. 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。