3,301 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Builds vendor-agnostic detection rules using the Sigma rule format for threat detection across SIEM platforms including Splunk, Elastic, and Microsoft Sentinel. Use when creating portable detection logic from threat intelligence, mapping rules to MITRE ATT&CK techniques, or converting community Sigma rules into platform-specific queries using sigmac or pySigma backends.
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。
Detect and analyze Linux persistence mechanisms including crontab entries, systemd service units, LD_PRELOAD hijacking, bashrc modifications, and authorized_keys backdoors using auditd and file integrity monitoring
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 custom quality checklists for validating requirements completeness and clarity. Use to create unit tests for English that ensure spec quality before implementation.
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。
Summarise the unit and e2e tests a branch/PR adds, run only those, and produce a paste-ready report (e.g. for a Linear card). Use when asked to 'summarise added tests', 'run the new tests', 'what tests did this PR add', or to prove a card's test coverage.
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-language test infrastructure for the Pump SDK — Rust unit/integration/security/performance tests, TypeScript Jest tests, Python fuzz tests, shell test orchestration, Criterion benchmarks, and CI quality gates.
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。
Run the project's validation pipeline (lint → format → typecheck → unit tests) with auto-fixes, then optionally stage and write a Conventional Commit. Use before committing, when asked to "check", "validate", "run the workflow", or "get this commit-ready".
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 writing unit/integration tests for Vite projects - provides Vitest configuration, test APIs, mocking patterns, and coverage 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。
Build, start, and drive the Nuxt Theme Builder in a real browser (Playwright) to verify a change end to end — editor interactions, iframe preview sync, persistence across reloads, source view. Use when asked to run/start/screenshot the app or to prove a UI or persistence change works beyond unit tests.
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。
Synthesize user interviews, observations, surveys, support tickets, reviews, or feedback into traceable themes, insights, tensions, opportunities, and research gaps; use when evidence must inform product or design 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。
Roblox and Luau game code standards. Writes, reviews, and fixes Script, LocalScript, and ModuleScript code and game systems such as shops, DataStore saves, RemoteEvents, combat, NPCs, and UI. Use when a request involves Luau code or a Roblox Studio project, even when Roblox is never named, when a game bug is reported with no file named, and when the user asks to keep these standards active. Also covers Rojo, Argon, Azul, Script Sync, Studio MCP, and community libraries such as ProfileStore, Knit, Trove, and Fusion. Applies to requests written in any language. Not for plain Lua outside Roblox (Neovim, LOVE, Defold, other engines) or for game design with no Luau to write or 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。
기능의 external behavior를 Cucumber 인수 테스트(주 검증층)로 구축 — .feature 실행으로 문서↔코드 드리프트를 구조적으로 차단, Four Layer(Steps→Protocol Driver→SUT), 태그 기반 가역 제외, 기존 JUnit 인수 테스트 이관. "인수 테스트 도입", "Gherkin을 실행 가능하게", "cucumber 셋업" 요청 시 사용. /cucumber-acceptance로 호출.
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。
Econometrics skill for time series analysis. Activates when the user asks about: "time series", "stationarity", "unit root test", "ADF test", "KPSS test", "ARIMA", "ARMA", "autocorrelation", "ACF", "PACF", "VAR model", "VECM", "Granger causality", "cointegration", "impulse response function", "forecast", "seasonal decomposition", "ARCH", "GARCH", "时间序列", "平稳性检验", "单位根", "自回归", "格兰杰因果", "协整", "脉冲响应", "预测", "向量自回归"
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 NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3 (Incident Response Recommendations for Cybersecurity Risk Management). Use for CSF 2.0-aligned incident response life cycles, IR roles, Community Profile priorities for DE/RS/RC and preparation, playbooks, coordination, and continuous improvement. Covers 800-61r3 only; does not replace CSF 2.0 full text, SP 800-61r2 tactical playbooks, or sector-specific breach-notification law.
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。
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 the DoD Test & Evaluation Enterprise Guidebook (OUSD R&E, August 2022). Use for DoD test and evaluation (T&E) across the Adaptive Acquisition Framework — the four test communities (contractor testing, developmental DT&E, operational OT&E, live-fire LFT&E); the five operational events (Operational Demonstration, EOA, OA, IOT&E, FOT&E) and the OTRR gate; the T&E Strategy / TEMP and its IDSK, with the upstream documents that feed it and the test plans that decompose it; the T&E organizations and oversight roles (USD(R&E), DOT&E, TRMC, the Service Executives and OTAs, the T&E WIPT, CDT); and pathway-specific T&E for all six acquisition pathways (Urgent Capability, Middle Tier, Major Capability, Software, Defense Business Systems). Statutory anchors include 10 U.S.C. §4171 (IOT&E) and §4172 (LFT&E/FUSL). This is guidance, not policy: it points outward to DoDI 5000.89 and the DoDI 5000-series for binding detail, and is thin on detailed test statistics/design-of-experiments methodology, cost estimating, the Acquisition of Services pathway, and any CUI/CAC-gated companion guides.
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 sustainability or ESG reports the user provides into a DRAFT question pack for reviewers: every quantitative disclosure as stated with unit, period, boundary and page, year-over-year changes computed only from the stated figures with the arithmetic shown, targets with stated and computed progress, restatements and inconsistencies, gaps and specific questions to the report owner. No assurance, accuracy or conformance verdict. Use when the user asks to "prepare review questions on our sustainability report", "what changed year on year in this ESG report", "check the figures in this report before it goes to the board", "find the gaps in this ESG disclosure" or "build a question pack for the report owner". Do not use for reviewing marketing text against environmental-claim rules, use green-claims-review 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。
Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or product plan in character as a Chief Product Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, product and adoption risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CPO review", "pressure-test this product plan", "what would a CPO say about this", "challenge the user evidence" or "check the roadmap opportunity cost". Do not use for positioning, messaging or launch marketing, use cmo-reviewer instead; for internal staff adoption of a rollout, use frontline-skeptic-reviewer; for what a change asks of paying customers, use customer-advocate-reviewer. 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。
Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Chief Business Officer archetype, covering commercial model, partnerships, deal structure, market positioning, strategic fit and opportunity cost, and returns a DRAFT review with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, commercial risks and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CBO review", "pressure-test this partnership", "check the deal structure" or "what would a commercial executive say about this". Do not use for pipeline, quota, sales-motion or forecast reviews, use cro-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。
Write, compile, load, debug and re-use SuperCollider SynthDefs with sc_synthdef - the unit of sound design in SuperCollider. Covers Out and ReplaceOut, argument naming, envelopes and doneAction, why a def must be loaded on a specific server before /s_new works, and how to read the compiler's error rather than guessing.
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 Discord via its REST API — post/read channel messages, manage guilds + roles, fire webhooks, register slash commands. Use when the user wants a bot to post to a channel, read recent history, run a community admin task, or ship one-way notifications via webhook URL without running a bot process.
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。
Discover and execute specialized skills from a curated marketplace catalog on GitHub, fetched on-demand and run ephemerally (no permanent installation). The catalog covers a broad and growing range — document generation (PDF/Word/Excel/PowerPoint), visual design, presentations, web app testing, animated GIFs, dev tooling (MCP scaffolding, frontend components), creative outputs (algorithmic art), technical documentation lookup (library/API/framework references), and more. Consult this skill whenever the user asks for a capability that could plausibly be covered by a community skill — the catalog is the source of truth, not this description.
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。
Score how much attention a person deserves: classify them (investor, engineer, student, partner, community, noise, personal), estimate the value they can bring in the next 90 days, their temperature, and the next move. Triggers: /worth, how valuable is <who>, who is <who>, should I reply to <who>, score this person, score this lead.
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。