「issue」の検索結果

Review+fix protocol with optional pre-core git diff review and safety guardrails (unsoundness, invariants, footguns, incidental complexity). Use when prompts say "/tw-fix this PR", "fix current branch", "fix this diff", "repair CI red", or "apply a minimal patch", and when crash/corruption/invariant-break issues need correction with a validation signal. Stop only after self-review exhausts actionable changes, each full cycle reaches post-self-review rerun plus terminal diff-review closure, and two consecutive zero-edit full cycles are clean.

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 code for potential issues and improvements. Use when asked to review specific files, functions, or code sections.

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 diagnosing a bug, exception, regression, wrong result, failing flow, or unknown root cause in repository code using callers/callees, execution flows, recent changes, and impact analysis; not for implementing a known fix without investigation.

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 the user asks to create, find, update, assign, label, prioritize, transition, or organize ISLAMU Event issues/cycles/modules in Plane via MCP; not for local todo lists or implementation-plan 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。

Annuler un envoi de courrier papier déjà validé via l'API Merci Facteur (deleteEnvoi). Utiliser quand il s'agit d'annuler, supprimer, stopper, rappeler ou rembourser un courrier envoyé par erreur, d'implémenter une fenêtre d'annulation dans une application, ou de comprendre pourquoi une annulation n'a été que partielle. Couvre le contrat deleteEnvoi, l'irréversibilité de l'opération et les quatre issues possibles.

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。

Start work on a Jira ticket by fetching ticket details, creating a properly named feature branch, and beginning codebase investigation. Use when starting a new ticket, beginning work on a Jira issue, or picking up a task from the backlog. Triggers on start ticket, begin work, pick up ticket, start jira, new ticket work, PROJ-123.

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 DoD Systems Engineering Guidebook (OUSD R&E, February 2022). Use for the DoD SE process model — the 16 SE processes (8 technical management + 8 technical) mapped to ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288, the event-driven technical reviews and audits across the Major Capability Acquisition life cycle (ASR, SRR, SFR, PDR, CDR, SVR/FCA, PRR, PCA), the Systems Engineering Plan (SEP), risk/issue/opportunity management, TPMs and leading indicators, system-of-systems and digital engineering, and the 24 design considerations (RAM, system safety, HSI, system security engineering, MOSA, supportability, etc.). Acquisition-program oriented: thin on detailed cost estimating, contracting law, and non-DoD or commercial life cycles.

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 EU Artificial Intelligence Act — Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. Use for AI system classification (high-risk vs prohibited vs general), conformity assessment procedures, GPAI model obligations, transparency and disclosure requirements, governance structure (AI Office / AI Board), penalty tiers, value-chain operator obligations, post-market monitoring, and Annex III use-case analysis. Does not cover EU liability rules for AI (separate proposed directive) or implementation guidance documents issued after July 2024.

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 FAA Systems Engineering Manual (SEM) v1.0.1. Use for civil-agency systems engineering as the FAA practices it inside the Acquisition Management System (AMS) and the National Airspace System (NAS): the five-phase AMS lifecycle and its decision points; operational concept development and implementation-free functional analysis (ConOps, FFBD/N², CMLs); requirements analysis and architectural design synthesis (PRS→MRS, the PRD ratchet pPRD→iPRD→fPRD, RAM, ISEF/DoDAF views, CPRs); the seven technical management disciplines (Integrated Technical Management/SEMP, Interface Management/IRD-ICD, Risk-Issue-Opportunity, Configuration Management, SE Information Management, Decision Analysis, Verification & Validation); and the specialty disciplines (RMA via Service Threads/STLSC, Life Cycle Engineering, E3/Spectrum, Human Factors, Information Security via the NIST RMF, System Safety via the SMS, and Hazardous Materials/Environmental/EOSH). Scope limits: this is FAA-specific guidance, not policy — it is a tailorable menu that points outward to companion handbooks (FAA-HDBK-006A for RMA, the SMS Manual, the NIST 800-series) rather than restating generic SE theory; it is thin on detailed cost estimating, contracting/FAR law, software-development methodology, named anti-pattern catalogues, and any non-FAA or non-civil-aviation lifecycle. Source has no page numbers in the extracted text (~360 pp.).

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。

Reviews the text and structure of a document, slide deck or web page against the accessibility rules the user supplies, or a default set covering heading structure, image alternative text, colour used as the only cue, link text, reading order, tables and language, and returns numbered findings with location, rule, severity and a ready-to-apply fix for the author, plus proposed alt text and a list of checks that need a tool or a person. Use when the user asks to "check this document for accessibility", "review the alt text in this deck", "is this page accessible", "run an accessibility check on these slides", "find accessibility issues before I publish" or "check my headings and link text". Do not use for brand or template compliance of slides, use branded-deck-builder 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。

Abstracts one contract into a key-terms table with clause references, compares each term against the user's playbook of standard positions, and returns a DRAFT contract review pack: deviations and issues, open questions and a reviewer checklist. Flags governing law and never gives legal advice or enforceability or acceptability calls. Use when the user asks to "review this contract", "abstract the key terms", "summarise this MSA", "pressure-test this SOW against our playbook" or to compare an agreement with their standard positions. Do not use for a first pass on a stand-alone NDA, use nda-triage instead, or for one clause lined up across several documents, use clause-comparison-table 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 issue of an internal newsletter from the items the user provides (notes, messages, snippets, meeting outputs, contributor submissions): a running order with the reason for each position, a factual headline and one paragraph per item with its source line, one call to action per item with date and route, two subject-line options, an item register accounting for every item supplied, and a list of items that need an owner's confirmation before send. Use when the user asks to "draft this month's newsletter", "turn these items into the team update", "write the staff bulletin from these notes", "order and headline these items" or "prepare the internal digest". Do not use for one piece of news that needs its own send, use announcement-drafter instead; for a digest of external news, use news-monitor-digest; for a personal weekly status note, use weekly-status-update-writer. 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 long support ticket thread (helpdesk history, email chain, chat transcript, call notes) into a one-page DRAFT escalation summary: the customer's ask in their own words, account context as stated, a dated history, what was tried and the stated result of each attempt, the current state, and what is needed from whom by when, every line referenced to a message and every missing fact marked UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "escalate this ticket", "summarise this thread for tier two", "write the hand-over for this case", "what has been tried so far", "brief engineering on this customer issue" or "prepare the escalation note". Do not use for a batch of tickets, use ticket-triage-pack instead; for the review after an outage, use incident-postmortem-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。

Builds a DRAFT data dictionary from a schema export, table definition, sample rows or a partial existing dictionary: one row per field with the name as stated, type as stated or observed, meaning quoted from the documentation supplied, owner, allowed values, and UNKNOWN wherever no source defines the field, plus a gap list for the data owner. Never infers a definition from a column name. Use when the user asks to "build a data dictionary for this table", "document these columns", "what does each field mean", "turn this schema export into a dictionary" or "fill in the field definitions from these documents". Do not use for profiling values or finding patterns in the data, use dataset-insight-pack instead; for metric definitions, use kpi-definition-sheet; for logging data defects, use data-quality-issue-log. 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 KPIs or metrics into a DRAFT definition sheet: one row per KPI with the name as stated, formula quoted from a source, source system, owner, refresh cadence, unit, filters and known caveats, with UNKNOWN in every cell no source fills and a gap list grouped by data owner. Never composes a formula, sets a target or names an owner the sources do not state. Use when the user asks to "define these KPIs", "build a metrics definition sheet", "document how each KPI is calculated", "which of our KPIs have no owner or formula" or "reconcile the two KPI lists". Do not use for the weekly numbers report, use kpi-weekly-report-writer instead; for field-level definitions of a table, use data-dictionary-builder; for logging a wrong figure as a defect, use data-quality-issue-log. 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。

Find bugs, security vulnerabilities, and code quality issues in local branch changes. Use when asked to review changes, find bugs, security review, or audit code on the current branch.

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。

Perform root cause analysis on a bug fix. Use when the user says 'run RCA on [commit/PR]', 'root cause analysis', or 'analyze what caused this bug'. Accepts a commit SHA, PR number, issue, or description of a fix.

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。

Query and mutate Linear issues, projects, cycles, teams, workflow states, and comments via its GraphQL API. Use when the user wants to read or change Linear data programmatically — without the MCP server, and without hand-navigating the Linear UI.

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。

Operate Jira Cloud via its REST v3 API — issues, projects, sprints, boards, comments, transitions, JQL search. Use when the user wants to triage, bulk-update, report on, or otherwise interact with Jira programmatically without the MCP server installed.

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。

Operate on GitHub via the REST API — repos, PRs, issues, code search, actions, releases. Use when the user wants scripted / cross-repo operations, doesn't have `gh` installed, or needs behavior the `gh` CLI doesn't expose cleanly.

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 live third-party GitHub issues and discussions on topics where you have real hands-on experience and artifacts, then reply with that experience to build reputation. Use when asked to answer people about your work, find threads matching your expertise, or reply with evidence from your own setup.

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。

Gate for any outbound message before it leaves: pull request or issue comment, DM, invite, post, email. Use before sending to check facts, tone, platform rules, registry status and AI-slop, and to block text that 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。

- СОРСИНГ ПОД РЕЙЗ в два трека: инвесторы из нашего VC-графа (leads.db) и покупатели-пилоты, найденные ПО СИМПТОМУ в интернете (GitHub issues, Hacker News, X, наши же репозитории, клуб СОСТАВ). Триггеры: “/raise-sourcing“, “/sourcing“, “собери список инвесторов“, “кому питчить“, “найди покупателей“, “добери лидов под рейз“, “кого звать в пилот“, “обнови стол сорсинга“, “raise sourcing“

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 an evergreen teaching longform for non-technical readers built from your own real material (systems you run, dated failures, numbers), structured as a stitched lesson that can live as a blog post, a GitHub guide hub and a newsletter issue. Use when turning lived engineering experience into a durable how-to. Triggers: /guide, make a guide, build a lesson, evergreen guide.

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。