1,758 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Generate a daily or weekly digest of activity across all connected sources. Use when catching up after time away, starting the day and wanting a summary of mentions and action items, or reviewing a week's decisions and document updates grouped by project.
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。
Write contextual commits that capture intent, decisions, and constraints alongside code changes. Use when committing code, finishing a task, or when the user asks to commit. Extends Conventional Commits with structured action lines in the commit body that preserve WHY code was written, not just WHAT changed.
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。
Adversarial thinking partner for founders and executives. Stress-tests plans, prepares for brutal board meetings, dissects decisions with no good options, and forces honest post-mortems. Use when you need someone to find the holes before the board does, make a decision you've been avoiding, or understand what actually went wrong.
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。
EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) operational compliance for compliance teams. Three Article-level decisions: (1) What's the risk tier of this AI system — prohibited (Art. 5), high-risk (Art. 6 + Annex III), limited-risk (Art. 50), or minimal-risk? (2) For high-risk systems, what's the Article 43 conformity assessment route (Module A internal control vs Module H full QMS + notified body) and what goes in the Annex IV technical documentation? (3) Per organizational role (provider / deployer / importer / distributor / authorized representative), what are the active obligations and deadlines? Use during AI system intake review, when planning conformity assessment, or when scoping deployer obligations. Cites Articles + Annexes for every output. NOT executive AI strategy (see chief-ai-officer-advisor). NOT a legal substitute.
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。
/em:hard-call — Framework for decisions with no good options. Use when every option is painful and a structured 10/10/10 + regret-minimization pass is needed — e.g. choosing between a layoff and a down round, or killing a beloved product line.
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。
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 AI Management System (AIMS) specialist for compliance teams running internal audits. Three decisions: (1) Where are the gaps against Clauses 4-10 and what do we close first? (2) What goes in the AI risk register and which Annex A controls treat each risk? (3) What's the 12-month internal audit plan that satisfies Clause 9.2? Use when preparing for certification, scoping internal audit cycles, or onboarding AI systems into an existing ISMS (27001) / QMS (13485) program. NOT an executive AI strategy skill (see chief-ai-officer-advisor). NOT EU AI Act compliance (see compliance-team-eu-ai-act).
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。
Mint a tamper-evident, post-quantum-signed receipt for a consequential agent action (deploy, delete, pay, grant-access, model decision) so it can be verified later from the certificate alone. Use when an autonomous agent takes a side-effecting action that may need to be proven later, or when satisfying EU AI Act Article 12 record-keeping. Three decisions: whether an action needs a receipt, minting it, verifying it. Signing is delegated to the open-source OpenAgentOntology package. Not after-the-fact log analysis; not a hosted notary; not a legal opinion.
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。
When the user wants to audit, redesign, or plan their website's structure, URL hierarchy, navigation design, or internal linking strategy. Use when the user mentions 'site architecture,' 'URL structure,' 'internal links,' 'site navigation,' 'breadcrumbs,' 'topic clusters,' 'hub pages,' 'orphan pages,' 'silo structure,' 'information architecture,' or 'website reorganization.' Also use when someone has SEO problems and the root cause is structural (not content or schema). NOT for content strategy decisions about what to write (use content-strategy) or for schema markup (use schema-markup).
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。
This skill should be used when the user asks to "design system architecture", "evaluate microservices vs monolith", "create architecture diagrams", "analyze dependencies", "choose a database", "plan for scalability", "make technical decisions", or "review system design". Use for architecture decision records (ADRs), tech stack evaluation, system design reviews, dependency analysis, and generating architecture diagrams in Mermaid, PlantUML, or ASCII format.
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。
World-class senior data scientist skill specialising in statistical modeling, experiment design, causal inference, and predictive analytics. Covers A/B testing (sample sizing, two-proportion z-tests, Bonferroni correction), difference-in-differences, feature engineering pipelines (Scikit-learn, XGBoost), cross-validated model evaluation (AUC-ROC, AUC-PR, SHAP), and MLflow experiment tracking — using Python (NumPy, Pandas, Scikit-learn), R, and SQL. Use when designing or analysing controlled experiments, building and evaluating classification or regression models, performing causal analysis on observational data, engineering features for structured tabular datasets, or translating statistical findings into data-driven business decisions.
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。
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。
Founder-mode executive team. 13 cs-* C-suite agents (CFO, CMO, CRO, CPO, COO, CHRO, CISO, GC, CDO, CAIO, CCO, VPE, Chief of Staff) and 21 /cs:* slash commands for forcing-question office hours, multi-role boardroom deliberation, strategic sprint pipeline, and meta routing. Use when the founder needs a virtual executive team, when invoking /cs:* commands, or when orchestrating multi-role decisions.
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。
Executive leadership guidance for strategic decision-making, organizational development, and stakeholder management. Use when planning strategy, preparing board presentations, managing investors, developing organizational culture, making executive decisions, fundraising, or when user mentions CEO, strategic planning, board meetings, investor updates, organizational leadership, or executive strategy.
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。
Systematic competitor tracking that feeds CMO positioning, CRO battlecards, and CPO roadmap decisions. Use when analyzing competitors, building sales battlecards, tracking market moves, positioning against alternatives, or when user mentions competitive intelligence, competitive analysis, competitor research, battlecards, win/loss, or market positioning.
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。
Multi-agent board meeting protocol for strategic decisions. Runs a structured 6-phase deliberation: context loading, independent C-suite contributions (isolated, no cross-pollination), critic analysis, synthesis, founder review, and decision extraction. Use when the user invokes /cs:boardroom, calls a board meeting, or wants structured multi-perspective executive deliberation on a strategic question.
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。
Chief Data Officer advisory for startups: AI training data rights and consent provenance, data product strategy (warehouse vs lakehouse vs mesh, build-vs-buy), B2B customer-data-as-asset valuation and M&A readiness, data team org evolution. Use when deciding whether to train models on customer data, choosing data architecture, valuing data for fundraising or M&A, sequencing data hires, or when user mentions CDO, chief data officer, data strategy, data mesh, lakehouse, training data, data product, data monetization, or customer data asset. NOT a tactical data engineering skill — strategic decisions only.
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。
Chief AI Officer advisory for startups: model build-vs-buy decisions (API vs fine-tune vs in-house), AI risk classification under EU AI Act + US state patchwork, AI cost economics (API-to-self-hosted breakeven), and AI team org evolution. Use when deciding whether to call an API or fine-tune, classifying AI use cases for regulatory risk, calculating when self-hosting pays off, sequencing AI hires, or when user mentions CAIO, AI strategy, model selection, foundation model, fine-tuning, EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, AI governance, model risk, or AI economics. Strategic only — does not duplicate engineering AI/ML skills.
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。
Prioritize a backlog of feature ideas based on impact, effort, risk, and strategic alignment with top 5 recommendations. Use when prioritizing a feature backlog, making scope decisions, or ranking product ideas.
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。
Summarize a meeting transcript into structured notes with date, participants, topic, key decisions, summary points, and action items. Use when processing meeting recordings, creating meeting notes, writing meeting minutes, or recapping discussions.
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 refined user personas from research data — 3 personas with JTBD, pains, gains, and unexpected insights. Use when building personas from survey data, creating user profiles from research, or segmenting users for product decisions.
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。
Analyze and prioritize a list of feature requests by theme, strategic alignment, impact, effort, and risk. Use when reviewing customer feature requests, triaging a backlog, or making prioritization decisions.
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。
A GDD changed — scan ADRs and the traceability index for now-stale architectural decisions. Impact report, guides resolution.
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。
Author the architecture blueprint before code is written. Validates decisions against the pinned engine, flags knowledge gaps.
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。