Results for “knowledge”

Semantic + keyword search and connection-discovery across the user's own Apple Notes via the apple-notes MCP server. Use when the user wants to find, recall, or synthesize something from their notes, or surface non-obvious bridges/related notes. macOS, on-device.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Build RAG (Retrieval Augmented Generation) pipelines with web search and LLMs. Tools: Tavily Search, Exa Search, Exa Answer, Claude, GPT-4, Gemini via OpenRouter. Capabilities: research, fact-checking, grounded responses, knowledge retrieval. Use for: AI agents, research assistants, fact-c...

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

A hybrid memory system that provides persistent, searchable knowledge management for AI agents (Architecture, Patterns, Decisions).

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

OpenCTI is an open-source platform for managing cyber threat intelligence knowledge, built on STIX 2.1 as its native data model. This skill covers building an automated IOC enrichment pipeline using O

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

MITRE ATT&CK is a globally-accessible knowledge base of adversary tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) based on real-world observations. This skill covers systematically mapping threat actor beh

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Turns a list of merged changes, closed work items or commit messages the user provides into DRAFT release notes under the version heading and date the user supplies, grouped as features, fixes and other, in the organisation's tone from the style guide or prior notes given, with every entry traced to its source item, breaking changes and required actions flagged first, and internal-only items held back for the release owner to confirm. Use when the user asks to "write the release notes for this version", "turn these merged pull requests into a changelog", "summarise what shipped this sprint for customers", "draft the what's new for this release" or "group these closed tickets into release notes". Do not use for an announcement email or intranet post about a launch, use announcement-drafter instead; for a change ticket, use change-request-pack; for a how-to article about one fix, use knowledge-article-drafter. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Drafts one service catalogue entry (description, scope in and out, owners and support groups, service levels exactly as provided, request path, dependencies, charging, lifecycle) from the service team's notes, questionnaire answers or existing documents, with UNKNOWN and a question list for every field the inputs do not cover. Never invents a service level, owner or price. Use when the user asks to "write the catalogue entry for this service", "turn these questionnaire answers into a service description", "tidy this request catalogue item" or "check this draft entry for empty fields". Do not use for a how-to or known-error article, use knowledge-article-drafter instead; for operating procedures, use runbook-drafter. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Reviews the instructions text and skills of a declarative agent, with its stated capabilities, knowledge sources and audience, for prompt-injection exposure, data-leakage paths, over-broad permissions and missing refusals, and returns an attack-surface map, a findings table with severity, quoted evidence and attack path, one pasteable fix per finding, a probe pack the owner can run and a refusal-coverage table. Use when the user asks to "red-team this agent", "check these instructions for prompt injection", "could this agent leak data", "review the permissions on my agent" or "what should this agent refuse". Do not use for checking a SKILL.md against the format rules, use skill-file-reviewer instead; do not use for designing the launch test set, use agent-evaluation-plan instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Designs a pre-launch evaluation plan for a declarative agent from its instructions text, skills, capabilities, knowledge sources and sample requests: a behaviour contract of testable statements quoted from the text, test prompts by scenario family and tier with setup, expected behaviour, pass and fail criteria and red flags, a red-flag catalogue, a blank scoring sheet, a coverage table and a go or no-go checklist the owner completes and decides. Use when the user asks to "write test cases for my agent", "how do I evaluate this agent before launch", "build a test plan for the agent", "what should I check before publishing this agent" or "give me a go no-go checklist". Do not use for finding injection or leakage exposures in the instructions, use agent-instructions-red-team instead; do not use for reviewing one SKILL.md, use skill-file-reviewer instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Answers an employee's or manager's HR policy question strictly from the policy documents the user supplies or the agent can reach as knowledge: a DRAFT answer that quotes the governing clause with its document, version and clause reference, lists the conditions and exceptions the text states, returns UNKNOWN where the documents are silent and names the role to ask. Never invents a rule, fills a gap from general practice or decides an individual's case. Use when the user asks to check a policy, for example "what does the policy say about", "am I entitled to", "how many days of leave do I get", "what is the process for requesting", "does the handbook allow" or "which clause covers". Do not use for comparing two policy versions or briefing a change, use policy-change-briefing instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Builds a DRAFT quiz from the training content the user supplies (slide deck, manual, e-learning script, session transcript, procedure): numbered questions with the correct answer, distractors drawn from the content itself, an explanation quoting the source passage with its location, a difficulty tag (Recall, Apply, Analyse) with its basis, and a coverage table showing which sections and objectives each question tests and which are left uncovered. Use when the user asks to "build a quiz from this deck", "write knowledge check questions for this module", "create an assessment from this training", "test understanding of this procedure" or "which sections does this quiz cover". Do not use for a reader-facing question and answer page built from documents, use faq-builder instead; for writing the procedure itself from notes or a walkthrough, use sop-drafter. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Builds a self-contained single-file HTML project dashboard (status banner, milestones table, risks heat list, decisions log, links) from the project tracker files the user attaches, pastes or holds in configured knowledge sources, and returns the complete HTML source in chat ready to save as dashboard-project-date.html. Use when the user asks to "build a dashboard for this project", "make a status page I can pin in the team channel", "give me an HTML overview of milestones, risks and decisions", "refresh the project dashboard from the tracker" or "turn these tracker files into a one-page visual summary". Do not use for creating or updating the tracker files or for the written weekly status report, use project-status-tracker instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Drafts a document transmittal (header, one line per document with revision and purpose of issue, distribution with action required, blank acknowledgement block) from a document list and the project's transmittal template, with UNKNOWN for anything not stated and questions for document control. Never assigns a transmittal number, changes a revision or marks anything issued. Use when the user asks to "draft a transmittal for these documents", "fill in the issue sheet" or "prepare the document issue note". Do not use for checking a register or deliverables list, use master-document-register-check instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Decision protocol for strategic work: recall the knowledge vault, run a gap analysis, emit a deep-research prompt for external tools, then synthesize the returned reports into a decision memo. Use before any new product, feature, market, pricing, GTM or architecture call, where local recall alone is not enough. Triggers: "/alfa-search-recall-deepresearch", "alpha protocol", "R+DR".

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

ローカルMarkdownファイルによる個人ナレッジベースを管理する。メモ・記録・ノートの保存、検索・参照、会議メモの構造化、既存ファイルの取り込みに使用する。Do NOT use for プロジェクトのソースコードやSDDドキュメントの管理。

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Domain knowledge for using PrintKK print-on-demand API tools effectively. PrintKK is a print-on-demand platform that lets sellers create custom products, manage designs, upload images, and fulfill orders via API. Use this skill whenever the user wants to interact with PrintKK — browsing products, creating designs, placing orders, managing images, or building integrations with the PrintKK API. Also trigger when the user mentions "PrintKK", "print on demand", "POD fulfillment", custom product design workflows, or wants to automate their PrintKK store operations.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Reconstructed reference notes on US NRC software assurance guidance for digital computer software in nuclear power plant safety systems, built from seven public-domain sources (Regulatory Guide 1.168 Revision 2, July 2013; Regulatory Guides 1.169, 1.170, 1.171, 1.172, and 1.173 Revision 1, July 2013; NUREG-0800 Branch Technical Position 7-14 Revision 6, August 2016; pinned 2026-10-12). Use for software life cycle process questions, software requirements specifications, software configuration management plans, verification and validation with reviews and audits, test documentation and unit testing, and what NRC staff examine in a BTP 7-14 software review of plans, implementation, and design outputs. SCOPE LIMITS: NRC Regulatory Guides and the BTP 7-14 staff review position only; the endorsed IEEE standards (IEEE Std 603-1991, 7-4.3.2-2003, 828-2005, 829-2008, 830-1998, 1008-1987, 1012-2004, 1028-2008, 1074-2006), IEC 60880, IEC 61513, IEC 62138, and IAEA guides are cited by designation and edition only, with no standard text; RG 1.152 Rev 4, BTP 7-18, BTP 7-19, other SRP Chapter 7 sections, and NUREG/CR contractor reports are outside the pack; reflects the pinned 2013 and 2016 editions, not later agency actions; synthesized reference notes, not legal or licensing advice and not a substitute for the source documents. LICENCE: Public Domain (US Government work, 17 U.S.C. § 105).

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Reconstructed reference notes on US FAA approval guidance for airborne software and airborne electronic hardware, built from four public-domain sources (FAA Order 8110.49A, AC 20-115D, AC 20-152A, AC 00-69; documents dated 2017-07-21 to 2022-10-07, pinned 2026-10-12). Use for how FAA certification staff plan and conduct software reviews (certification liaison, desk versus on-site review, review planning agreements), how the level of FAA involvement (LOI) is picked and scored with the Appendix A worksheets, how software conformity inspection works (software part and installation conformity, ASE and ASI tasks, Form 8120-10), what AC 20-115D recognizes and how DO-178B processes and tool qualification transition to DO-178C/DO-330 (supplements, FLS, UMS, legacy software changes), and what AC 20-152A adds for airborne electronic hardware (simple versus complex custom devices, robustness and HDL code coverage, tool assessment, previously developed hardware, COTS IP, COTS devices, circuit board assemblies), and what AC 00-69 adds as best practices for change impact analysis, data and control coupling, and design-level error handling (best practices, not guidance and not a means of compliance). SCOPE LIMITS: FAA guidance only, and guidance is not regulation (ACs are acceptable means, not the only means); no RTCA DO-178C or DO-254, EUROCAE ED-12C or ED-80, supplement, or SAE ARP text, which are copyrighted and named only (see the avionics-signpost pack); no AC 00-72 (named, not packed); no DO-178C software-level objective tables; no EASA AMC 20-115D or AMC 20-152A content (use easa-rules); reflects the pinned source dates, not later FAA actions; synthesized reference notes, not legal advice and not a substitute for the source documents. LICENCE: Public Domain (US Government work, 17 U.S.C. 105).

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Reconstructed reference notes on US FDA medical-device software regulation, built from seven public-domain FDA sources (the QMSR final rule 89 FR 7496, FDA device software guidance documents, and the eSTAR program page; pinned 2026-10-12). Use for regulatory pathways and premarket submissions (510(k), De Novo, PMA, eSTAR), premarket software documentation levels (Basic or Enhanced), software validation and Computer Software Assurance, the Quality Management System Regulation (QMSR, 21 CFR 820), medical-device cybersecurity (secure product development, SBOMs, FD&C Act section 524B, labelling), clinical decision support boundaries, off-the-shelf software, MDDS and other software-function scope questions, and the 510(k) software-change trigger. SCOPE LIMITS: US FDA device regulation only; no EU MDR or UKCA content (see `med-device-eu`); no ISO 13485, ISO 14971, or IEC 62304 text, which are named and summarized only as FDA obligations; no drug, biologic, or combination-product rules; reflects the pinned source dates, not later FDA actions; synthesized reference notes, not legal advice and not a substitute for the guidance documents. LICENCE: Public Domain (US Government work, 17 U.S.C. 105).

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Reconstructed reference notes on EU and UK medical-device software, built from six sources captured 2026-10-13: MDCG 2019-11 rev.1 (June 2025), MDCG 2020-6 (April 2020), MDCG 2020-13 (July 2020), MDCG 2020-7 (April 2020), MDCG 2020-8 (April 2020), and the MHRA software-applications guidance (2023-07-01) with its stand-alone software PDF. Use for SaMD qualification and classification, legacy-device clinical evidence, the clinical evaluation assessment report, the PMCF plan, and the PMCF evaluation report, under EU MDCG guidance or UK MHRA guidance. SCOPE LIMITS: EU MDR and UK MHRA device software only; no IEC 62304, ISO 13485, or ISO 14971 text; no MDR or IVDR regulation body text; MDCG guidance is not legally binding; MHRA guidance is UK-specific; synthesized notes, not legal advice. LICENCE: Per-document: European Commission reuse policy (Decision 2011/833/EU, CC BY 4.0, attribution and indication of changes) for the MDCG documents; Open Government Licence v3.0 for the MHRA guidance; reconstructed notes with attribution; official PDFs not redistributed.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Load when asked where code lives, how modules relate, what calls a symbol, what implements a feature, or for an architecture/codebase tour using the knowledge graph; not for bug diagnosis, diff review, or refactoring.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Load when asked to review a local diff/change set for correctness, regressions, blast radius, affected flows, and missing tests using the knowledge graph; use `review-pr` for intent/checklist/merge-gate evidence.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Time-boxed throwaway investigation to answer one hard question. Use when facing technical uncertainty before committing to a frontier item or scoped slice — the output is knowledge, not production code.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Knowledge comics (知识漫画): educational, biography, tutorial.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.