1.3万 件 ・ 人気順
概要と使いどころ
Use when the user asks for STRIDE threat modeling, DREAD risk scoring, data-flow-diagram threat analysis, or a quick secret scan — or when a security request needs routing to the right specialist skill (pen-testing, incident response, cloud posture, red team, AI security, threat hunting, secure code review). This skill owns threat modeling; everything else routes to a sibling.
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。
/cs:iso13485-audit-prep <scope> — ISO 13485 QMS audit 6-question forcing interrogation. Design controls + CAPA + post-market focused. Use before Clause 8.2.4 internal audit, MDR / FDA QSR alignment review, or product-launch DHF closure audit.
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 an RFP, RFI, RFQ, security questionnaire, vendor questionnaire, or proposal request arrives and the team needs a structured response — parsing multi-section buyer-dictated requirements (MANDATORY vs WEIGHTED vs NICE-TO-HAVE), building a Shipley-method proof-point matrix mapping each requirement to a verifiable proof point, articulating 3-5 win-themes that ladder up across requirements, and producing a Shipley-derived winrate estimate that informs a bid / no-bid / partner-bid recommendation. For Bid Managers, Proposal Leads, Directors of Sales, and Sales Engineers at the response-strategy moment. Surfaces GAP requirements explicitly — never invents claims. NOT free-form proposal narrative authoring, NOT contract redline, NOT marketing collateral.
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。
/cs:compliance-readiness <program> — Multi-framework compliance officer 6-question forcing interrogation of any compliance program. Use before starting a new framework, planning the annual audit calendar, or preparing for certification stage 1.
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。
/cs:iso27001-audit-prep <scope> — ISO 27001 ISMS audit readiness 6-question forcing interrogation. Use before annual Clause 9.2 internal audit, surveillance audit prep, or stage 1 certification readiness.
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。
Compliance OS — meta-orchestrator that lets compliance teams CONFIGURE which frameworks apply, COMPUTE cross-framework control overlap, SIMULATE internal audits, and CONSOLIDATE evidence across multiple frameworks. Four decisions: (1) Given a company profile, which of the 12 supported frameworks apply (ISO 27001/13485/42001/14971, EU AI Act, MDR 745, GDPR, SOC 2, FDA QSR, NIST CSF 2.0, NIS2, HIPAA)? (2) Across selected frameworks, which controls overlap and how much evidence reuses? (3) For a given framework + scope, what does a realistic mock audit produce — drawing from the 205-scenario library? (4) Across selected frameworks, what's the unified evidence checklist with reuse map? Use when standing up a multi-framework program, planning the annual audit calendar, or preparing for certification stage 1. Does NOT replace per-framework skills (it orchestrates them).
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。
Personal leadership development for founders and first-time CEOs. Covers founder archetype identification, delegation frameworks, energy management, CEO calendar audits, leadership style evolution, blind spot identification, imposter syndrome, founder mental health, and succession planning. Use when a founder feels like the bottleneck, struggles to delegate, is burning out, transitioning from IC to executive, managing a board, or when user mentions founder mode, CEO growth, leadership development, delegation, burnout, or imposter syndrome.
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。
/cs:soc2-audit-prep <scope> — SOC 2 Type II readiness 6-question forcing interrogation. Observation-period focused. Use before Type II observation begins, mid-period checkpoint, or pre-field-test month-10 readiness.
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。
Cross-functional what-if modeling for cascading multi-variable scenarios. Unlike single-assumption stress testing, this models compound adversity across all business functions simultaneously. Use when facing complex risk scenarios, strategic decisions with major downside, or when the user asks 'what if X AND Y both happen?'
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。
/cs:aims-audit <scope> — ISO/IEC 42001 AIMS internal-audit 6-question forcing interrogation. Use before certification stage 1, before annual internal audit cycles, or when onboarding a new AI system into an existing AIMS.
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。
/cs:ciso-review <plan> — Risk-paranoid interrogation of any plan that touches data, compliance, or production access. Use when launching features that handle customer data, before a SOC 2 / ISO audit, or after any incident or near-miss.
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。
/cs:fda-qsr-audit-prep <scope> — FDA 21 CFR 820 (QSR / QMSR) audit 6-question forcing interrogation. Post-Feb 2026 substantially harmonized with ISO 13485. Use before annual internal QSR audit, pre-FDA-inspection readiness, or Form 483 response.
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 assessing AI/ML systems for prompt injection, jailbreak vulnerabilities, model inversion risk, data poisoning exposure, or agent tool abuse. Covers MITRE ATLAS technique mapping, injection signature detection, and adversarial robustness scoring.
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。
/cs:cmo-review <plan> — Narrative-first interrogation of positioning, ICP, message house, and channel mix. Use when launching a campaign or repositioning, or when CAC is rising and the one-sentence positioning test fails.
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。
/cs:gdpr-audit-prep <scope> — GDPR audit 6-question Article-cited forcing interrogation. Use before annual internal GDPR review, post-breach internal audit, DPA investigation readiness, or acquisition due diligence.
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 running an annual SaaS audit, doing category-level spend review, or rationalizing the supplier base — when the user needs a spend audit, spend categorization (UNSPSC-aligned with Pareto breakdown and industry profiles), purchasing-cycle analysis (bottleneck categories per Goldratt's Theory of Constraints), or risk-balanced supplier consolidation that refuses single-source recommendations for tier-1 categories without a documented break-glass plan. Triggers on "spend audit", "SaaS audit", "spend categorization", "supplier rationalization", "supplier consolidation", "category strategy", "duplicate SaaS", "renewal cluster".
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。
Security leadership for growth-stage companies. Risk quantification in dollars, compliance roadmap (SOC 2/ISO 27001/HIPAA/GDPR), security architecture strategy, incident response leadership, and board-level security reporting. Use when building security programs, justifying security budget, selecting compliance frameworks, managing incidents, assessing vendor risk, or when user mentions CISO, security strategy, compliance roadmap, zero trust, or board security reporting.
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, scoring, or auditing third-party SaaS / vendor relationships — running a vendor scorecard with industry tuning, tracking SLA compliance with credit-claim flags, classifying third-party risk across 4 risk vectors, preparing a tier-1 vendor review, or auditing the SaaS portfolio. Forks context so large vendor catalogs (50-500 line items) and SLA logs don't pollute the parent thread. Triggers on "vendor SLA", "vendor scorecard", "third-party risk", "TPRM", "vendor review", "supplier performance", "vendor health check", "renewal review".
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 a Head of Ops, Knowledge Manager, or TPM-Internal needs to author, validate, or clean up company SOPs and internal runbooks (procurement intake, vendor offboarding, incident-comms cascade, employee onboarding) — including 5W2H completeness checks (Who-What-When-Where-Why-How-HowMuch), cross-link and orphan-page validation across a sprawling Notion/Confluence/Obsidian wiki, KB ingestion + hygiene reporting, and runbook step verification (named owner, expected duration, observable success signal, rollback path, escalation contact). Pairs Ishikawa's 5W2H method, Gawande's *The Checklist Manifesto*, ISO 9001, ITIL v4, and Google SRE Workbook runbook discipline with deterministic stdlib-only Python tools that score completeness, detect anti-patterns, and emit prioritized cleanup lists (e.g., "validate this runbook before it goes into rotation", "audit our Confluence wiki for stale and orphaned SOPs").
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。
Find when and why tests broke on main: bisect a Swift package suite on CI across old commits, read the failure matrix, and decide per test whether the test went stale or the code regressed. Use when a suite is red on main, when PR CI only ran filtered tests and the full suite has drifted, or when asked which PR broke a test.
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。
Shared behavior and mutation-path rules for cmux. Use when a behavior is exposed through multiple entrypoints such as keyboard shortcuts, command palette, context menu, CLI, settings, debug menu, optimistic UI, or tests that previously missed a bug.
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。
Localization rules and audit workflow for cmux UI strings, settings rows, menus, shortcuts, schema/config text, docs, command/help text, alerts, tooltips, and web messages. Use whenever changing user-facing text.
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。
Choose scoped cmux verification, add behavioral tests, and validate Swift test targets and wiring. Use when adding tests or deciding what local/CI evidence a change needs.
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。
Guide and apply cmux keyboard shortcut customization. Use when the user asks to customize, rebind, unbind, reset, audit, or create shortcut templates for cmux, including tmux-style, Vim-style, terminal-first, browser-heavy, iTerm/Terminal-like, or agent-triage layouts.
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。