3,141 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Package license analysis — detect copyleft conflicts against a permissive policy, surface AGPL / SSPL / GPL contaminants, output SPDX SBOM with per-package license findings. Use when auditing a release for license compliance, vetting a new dependency's license, building an OSS-attribution document, or producing a customer-facing license disclosure.
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 OpenVEX / CycloneDX VEX attestations from `.vulnetix/memory.yaml` triage decisions, optionally sign with cosign, optionally upload to Vulnetix and post to a GitHub PR. Use when documenting triage decisions for supply-chain consumers, attaching VEX to a CycloneDX SBOM, or satisfying customer attestation requests.
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 CycloneDX 1.7 and/or SPDX 2.3 SBOMs for the repo, optionally cosign-signed, optionally cross-validated against syft output. Use when producing an SBOM for compliance, attaching to a release artefact, integrating with an SBOM registry, or satisfying a customer attestation request.
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 the user wants to design, preview, or customize an Obsidian vault theme — including choosing styles, comparing color schemes, adjusting typography, or generating CSS snippets. Triggers on keywords like "Obsidian theme", "color scheme", "CSS snippet", "appearance".
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。
Compare your data to a partner's data in the marketplace. Given a dataset you already own with person/edge data, this skill walks you through picking a partner data source to match against, choosing which identifier types to match on, optionally selecting which enrichment attributes to attach, and then submits the report — returning overlap, match counts, and demographic coverage. Use when: "how does my data compare to your marketplace", "compare my data to [partner]", "how much overlap do I have with [supplier]", "run a match report", "match my customers against 3P data", "see what enrichment is available for my dataset", or any open-ended question about marketplace overlap. (narrative-identity)
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 look-alike audience from a seed audience and a candidate population dataset. Classifies Rosetta Stone attributes, generates the same materialized-view scoring pipeline Lookalike Studio emits (Naive-Bayes categorical weights + Gaussian continuous similarity), gates on approval, submits via `narrative_workflows_create`, and monitors the build to completion. Use when: "create a lookalike audience", "find more users like this segment", "expand my seed audience to 500k similar users", "score the population against my customers", "build a look-alike of dataset X". (narrative-audience)
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。
Translate a fuzzy analytical question into a rigorous investigation plan. Interrogates the ask, grounds the plan in the available data dictionary, applies analytical best practices, and produces a structured brief of query specifications for a downstream query-writing skill. Plans, does not write SQL. Use when: "why did X drop", "is there a relationship between A and B", "who are our highest-value customers", "what's driving the change in Y", "investigate this trend", "design an analysis for", "scope this analytical question". (narrative-common)
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 for AI SDK for Python async-generator tools, streaming tool output, subagent tools, PartialToolCallResult events, and custom tool aggregation.
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。
Conduct a Marty-Cagan-style opportunity assessment interview and produce a ~2-page Opportunity Brief in Confluence. Covers business objective, customer, problem, success metric, current alternatives, assumptions/risks, and what we don't know yet. Triggers on "opportunity brief", "opportunity assessment", "discovery brief", "who is this for", "why are we building this", "validate this idea", "product discovery", or any request to frame a feature before implementation. One question at a time. Records accepted research gaps as structured Confluence Decision pages with bidirectional links.
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 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 configuring GitBook documentation sites, authoring GitBook-flavored markdown pages and custom blocks, integrating OpenAPI/Swagger specs, driving GitBook Change Request workflows (create, review, comment, resolve), or building GitBook platform integrations. Do not use for general repository code reviews, general .NET OpenAPI schema generation, or non-GitBook markdown.
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。
validateSearch, search param validation with Zod/Valibot/ArkType adapters, fallback(), search middlewares (retainSearchParams, stripSearchParams), custom serialization (parseSearch, stringifySearch), search param inheritance, loaderDeps for cache keys, reading and writing search params.
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 NASA NPR 7123.1D — Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements. Use for the 17 common SE processes (SE Engine), life-cycle reviews and entrance/success criteria, SEMP structure and content, ETA roles and tailoring/customizing rules, Technology Readiness Levels (TRL 1–9), SE work product maturity terminology, contracted project oversight, and MOE/MOP/TPM measurement frameworks. Does not cover NASA programme financial management, human spaceflight medical standards, or software engineering requirements in depth (see NPR 7150.2 for the latter).
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 Expanded Guidance for NASA Systems Engineering (NASA/SP-2016-6105-SUPPL, Volume 1, March 2016) — the practitioner-depth supplement to the NASA SE Handbook. Use for the load-bearing mechanics the handbook compresses: the SE Engine's per-phase cadence and the iterative-vs-recursive distinction, the AS9100 crosswalk, life-cycle tailoring vs. customization and the Compliance Matrix, the recursive system-design consistency loop (ConOps vs. Operations Concept, requirement flow/type/ownership, successive refinement), product realization (verify/qualify/accept/certify cardinality, protoflight, 'test the way we fly' coverage, two-form transition), and the crosscutting technical-management procedures (six-step scheduling, cost-estimating method selection, JCL, interface document family, RIDM/CRM, CM baselines, EVM arithmetic, MOE/MOP/KPP/TPM, the three required leading indicators, and the decision-analysis method catalog). This is the DEPTH layer — it deliberately does NOT restate the base definitions; pair it with the nasa-se-handbook pack. Scope: NASA space-flight SE practice (Vol 1 Practices); thin on the Vol 2 process-appendix detail, on non-NASA/commercial life cycles, and on software-engineering methodology.
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。
Local, private capture of medical data: diagnoses, symptom histories and examination plans. No BACH origin — custom design with its own SQLite store. Strictly local, no cloud transfer.
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。
Sweeps a named list of news sources and blogs for items relevant to the user's role and returns a dated digest of 5 to 8 items, each with a one-line so-what, a source URL and a publication date, as a Markdown document or a ready-to-paste email. Use when the user asks to "run my news digest", "do my news sweep", "draft my morning news flash", "what happened in industry news this week" or to monitor vendor or industry news for their role. Do not use for the user's own inbox, calendar and mentions brief, use custom-daily-brief 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。
Prepares a DRAFT vendor risk screening brief from the material the user provides on one vendor (questionnaire answers, certificates, assurance reports, policies, contract extracts): per screening topic, what a document evidences with reference, date and scope, what is only asserted, what is missing or contradicted, certificate and report details as stated, and ready-to-send questions for the vendor and the internal owners. No web research, no risk rating, tier, score or recommendation. Use when the user asks to "screen this vendor", "review the vendor's questionnaire answers", "check what the vendor's certificate covers", "what is missing from this due diligence pack" or "draft the follow-up questions for the vendor". Do not use for answering a customer's questionnaire about your own organisation, use vendor-security-questionnaire-prefill 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 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.
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 a discovery call brief from what the user has on a prospect (CRM record, inbound form, emails, notes, public material the user supplies): what is known with sources, gaps against the qualification dimensions, hypotheses to test, questions in priority order and what to listen for. Returns a DRAFT Markdown brief in the chat. Use when the user asks to "prep me for the discovery call with <prospect>", "what should I ask on this first call", "intro call brief", "questions for the qualification call" or "what do we know before we speak to them". Do not use for scoring leads against a rubric, use lead-qualification-scorer instead; for an existing customer's account review use account-plan-builder. 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 stakeholder map for one project from the charter, organisation chart, RACI, governance terms, steering minutes, meeting notes and messages the user provides: a stakeholder register, interest and influence ratings each with its stated basis, stance as evidenced by a verbatim fragment with source and date, gaps, and a proposed engagement plan per stakeholder, every line traced to a source and every missing fact marked UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "build the stakeholder map", "who are the stakeholders on this project", "map interest and influence", "where does each stakeholder stand", "draft the stakeholder engagement plan" or "refresh the stakeholder register". Do not use for a customer account's stakeholders, use account-plan-builder instead; for a one-page brief before one meeting, use meeting-prep-onepager; for logging decisions and risks against the project, use project-status-tracker. 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。
Pre-tests one message (email, announcement, intranet post, town hall script, customer notice or slide) against two to six role personas the user supplies and returns a DRAFT panel report: each persona's likely first reaction, objections, unanswered questions, misreadings and what they would do next, every point tied to the passage that triggers it, plus suggested edits that add no fact the message does not already hold. Use when the user asks to "pre-test this message", "how will the team read this", "run this past the personas", "what objections will this raise", "find the holes before I send" or "check this lands with managers and field staff". Do not use for an in-character review of a proposal or business case by one executive archetype, use the executive-review family (cfo-reviewer, frontline-skeptic-reviewer and siblings) instead; to write the message in the first place, use announcement-drafter. 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 plain-language requests (emails, chat messages, form submissions, meeting asks, voicemail or call notes) into one intake record per request (what is asked, who asks and for whom, urgency as evidenced, category, suggested owner, missing information with draft clarifying questions) and a triage table sorted for the operations lead to act on. Use when the user asks to "log these requests", "triage this pile of asks", "turn this message into an intake record", "who should own this request", "what is missing before we can start" or "build today's intake list". Do not use for customer support tickets, use ticket-triage-pack instead; for clearing a personal mailbox by reply bucket, use inbox-triage. 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 the instructions field of a declarative agent that orchestrates a set of custom skills, under a character cap (default 8,000), from the skills' names and descriptions: role and scope, one routing rule per skill, workflow order, gates written as workflow holds, global rules, output format and what the agent never does. Returns the text in a fenced block with its character count labelled counted or estimated, plus a skill inventory, routing table, gate table, rules trace and open questions for the owner. Use when the user asks to "write the instructions for my agent", "draft a system prompt that ties these skills together", "tighten these agent instructions to fit the cap", "how should the agent route between these skills" or "revise my agent's orchestration text". Do not use to review a single SKILL.md, use skill-file-reviewer 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。
Drafts one anonymised DRAFT case study (situation, approach, outcome as evidenced, optional lessons) from engagement notes, status reports, closing reports, emails and metrics extracts the user supplies, with a fact trace to the notes, an evidence grade on every result, quotes only where the user supplied them with speaker role and permission, an anonymisation log and a confidentiality checklist that must be completed before publication. Use when the user asks to "write a case study from these notes", "turn this engagement into a customer story", "draft a success story for the website", "anonymise this project write-up" or "prepare a reference case for the proposal". Do not use for redacting identifiers from an existing document, use document-deidentification-pass instead; for checking whether a document's claims are substantiated, 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。