「decision」の検索結果

Tech Lead role in AID methodology. Use for architecture decisions, code reviews, technical direction, operational readiness, team guidance.

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。

Judge performance or resource claims on real hardware: benchmark design or review, latency, throughput, memory or headroom numbers, and accept-or-reject decisions on optimizations. Not for refactors with no resource claim.

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。

Track Two / internal innovation system for running small, fast experiments outside the core business. Runs in three modes — Diagnostic for designing the full Protoloop from scratch (intake channels, loop structure, team, exit paths), Review for running the monthly heartbeat meeting (loop-by-loop decisions, forward-loading, portfolio health), and Alert Triggers for defining tripwires that protect, feed, and maintain momentum in the system. Updates company-context.md after every run. Triggers on questions about innovation pipelines, intrapreneurship, Track Two strategy, experimentation systems, handling ideas that don't fit the core business, or building systematic exploration alongside exploitation. Based on 20 years of practice by Eterdis (eterdis.com).

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。

Culture assessment and monitoring with three modes — Diagnostic for a deep session surfacing the gap between declared culture and actual culture, Review for periodic check-ins on whether behavior is shifting, and Alert Triggers for setting tripwires around culture-strategy misalignment, regression, and integration risk. Not a culture change programme — a mirror. Updates company-context.md after every run. Triggers on questions about culture, values, team dynamics, how decisions really get made, why change efforts stall, merger integration, or whether the organisation can actually execute its strategy. Based on practice by Eterdis (eterdis.com).

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。

Research and stress-test open-source project names, from collision checks to launch-ready decisions. Use when the user asks to name or rename a project, compare candidate names, screen GitHub or package namespace risk, verify language or mythology claims, or improve SEO/GEO clarity. Perform live web and registry research, separate brand from category descriptor, classify collisions, and return one evidence-backed recommendation.

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 work is ambiguous or has multiple viable paths; compares options, assumptions, evidence, tradeoffs, and the best next action.

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 project memory, decisions, handoffs, genome, knowledge index, changelog, and patterns that must persist across sessions.

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 reproducible web searches and decision-oriented research across official sites, search engines, news, papers, forums, social platforms, and public datasets. Use when Codex must investigate a person, organization, product, market, technical resource, reputation, career choice, or other current topic; compare candidates; verify claims; collect dated citations; distinguish facts from inference and anecdote; or write an evidence-backed research report.

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。

Combine React's official "You Might Not Need an Effect" guidance with this project's stricter no direct useEffect stance. Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring React components that might reach for useEffect, derived state, event relays, reset logic, subscriptions, or client fetching.

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。

Combine React's official "You Might Not Need an Effect" guidance with this project's stricter no direct useEffect stance. Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring React components that might reach for useEffect, derived state, event relays, reset logic, subscriptions, or client fetching.

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。

Interviewing the owner to a shared understanding before any work starts. Use when a plan, a decision or an idea needs stress-testing, or when the owner asks to be grilled, interviewed or questioned about one.

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。

API design principles and decision-making. REST vs GraphQL vs tRPC selection, response formats, versioning, pagination.

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。

Master software architect specializing in modern architecture patterns, clean architecture, microservices, event-driven systems, and DDD. Reviews system designs and code changes for architectural integrity, scalability, and maintainability. Use PROACTIVELY for architectural 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。

Marc Andreessen-mode decision and productivity skill. A blunt, market-first operator that pressure-tests ideas, ventures, features, and career bets through Andreessen's actual frameworks — market dominates team and product; the only milestone that matters is product/market fit.

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 hybrid memory system that provides persistent, searchable knowledge management for AI agents (Architecture, Patterns, 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。

Conduct a defensible cybersecurity risk assessment using the NIST SP 800-30 Rev 1 methodology: prepare scope and a risk model, identify threat sources and threat events, identify vulnerabilities and predisposing conditions, determine likelihood and impact, compute risk, and communicate results as a prioritized risk register. Use when an organization needs an actual risk *assessment* (not a maturity score), when a control framework (CSF, ISO 27001, RMF, SOC 2, PCI) requires a documented risk analysis as input, when leadership asks "what are our top risks and how bad are they", when assessing risk for a new system or major change, or when building a risk register from scratch. This is the methodology that feeds framework selection, ATO packages, and treatment decisions. Keywords: risk assessment, NIST 800-30, threat modeling, likelihood and impact, risk register, risk analysis, threat sources, vulnerabilities, risk determination, qualitative risk, risk matrix, residual risk, risk treatment.

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 structured SOC incident response playbook for ransomware attacks covering detection, containment, eradication, and recovery phases with specific SIEM queries, isolation procedures, and decision trees. Use when SOC teams need formalized response procedures for ransomware incidents aligned to NIST SP 800-61 and MITRE ATT&CK ransomware techniques.

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。

Designs and documents structured incident response playbooks that define step-by-step procedures for specific incident types aligned with NIST SP 800-61r3 and SANS PICERL frameworks. Covers playbook structure, decision trees, escalation criteria, RACI matrices, and integration with SOAR platforms. Activates for requests involving IR playbook creation, incident response procedure documentation, response runbook development, or SOAR playbook design.

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。

Analyzes indicators of compromise (IOCs) including IP addresses, domains, file hashes, URLs, and email artifacts to determine maliciousness confidence, campaign attribution, and blocking priority. Use when triaging IOCs from phishing emails, security alerts, or external threat feeds; enriching raw IOCs with multi-source intelligence; or making block/monitor/whitelist decisions. Activates for requests involving VirusTotal, AbuseIPDB, MalwareBazaar, MISP, or IOC enrichment pipelines.

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。

Standard Operating Procedures for architecture decisions, security audits, deep code analysis, risk assessment, and critical problem solving.

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。

Fresh-eyes review of the project's PRD for gaps, contradictions, vague phrasing, and unresolved 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。

Development methodology rules (Clean Architecture, TDD flow, 3-Strike rule, decision priority) that govern planning, implementation, and review. Load before designing, staging, implementing, or reviewing code changes.

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。

Explicit-only interview loop for stress-testing a plan, decision, or idea. Use only when the user asks to grill, interrogate, interview, or stress-test their thinking before action.

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 and sharpen a project's domain model. Use only when actively changing glossary or ubiquitous-language terms, or recording a durable architectural decision; merely reading a glossary is not a trigger.

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。