335 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Review audit-related documents (control design documents, bottleneck analyses, requirements definitions, etc.) for quality, scoring them 0-100 with a severity-rated findings list. Use when reviewing audit documents, checking control design quality, or verifying cross-document consistency. Supports documents governed by US GAAP, IFRS, or J-GAAP.
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 AMS Lifecycle V&V Guidelines (verification and validation), Version 3.0, dated April 2017. Use for applying verification and validation across the FAA Acquisition Management System (AMS) lifecycle: the verify-vs-validate distinction (built right vs. right thing), the work-product/component/product tiers, the nine V&V planning elements, the four method catalogs (Appendix C), decision-point-gated V&V (SASP, CRD, Investment Analysis, Solution Implementation, In-Service Management), the Appendix B document checklists (PRD/APB/ISPD/PMP), and the DT/OT/IOA test triad. Scope limits: this is an FAA acquisition-V&V doctrine, NOT a general SE process model, requirements-engineering manual, or test-design textbook. It borrows its core V&V definitions from CMMI v1.2 (SEI, paraphrased) and presumes the surrounding AMS lifecycle (see the FAA SEM pack); its phase tables are policy snapshots as of April 2017 and it is thin on detailed test methods, tool specifics, and anything outside FAA acquisition governance.
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 7150.2D — NASA Software Engineering Requirements. Use for NASA's Agency-wide software-engineering requirements: the software classification scheme (Classes A–F), the Requirements Mapping Matrix and class-driven applicability, tailoring and Technical Authority governance, the SWE-### 'shall' requirements across software management (Ch 3) and the engineering life cycle (Ch 4), the supporting disciplines (configuration management, risk, peer reviews/inspections, measurement, non-conformance — Ch 5), safety-critical and cybersecurity requirements, IV&V applicability, traceability, and the Appendix A definitions. Does not cover detailed software-assurance/safety procedures (see NASA-STD-8739.8), implementation how-to and document content (see NASA-HDBK-2203), the systems-engineering process framework (see NPR 7123.1), or program/project management (see NPR 7120.5).
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。
Knowledge base from the DoD Risk, Issue, and Opportunity (RIO) Management Guide for Defense Acquisition Programs (OUSD R&E, Sep 2023 incl. Change 2.2). Use for the defense-acquisition mechanics of program risk management: the RIO definitions (risk/issue/opportunity), the five-step risk process (plan-identify-analyze-mitigate-monitor), 1-5 likelihood/consequence scoring and the 5x5 risk matrix, the four mitigation options (accept/avoid/transfer/control), burn-down plans, issue management (probability=1), opportunity management toward should-cost, cross-program/interface risk, tailoring RIO to the six AAF acquisition pathways (UCA/MTA/MCA/Software/DBS/Services), specialized methods (RMF, MBCRA/Cyber Table Top, Agile metrics, FMECA, ITRA/DTRAM), and institutionalizing RIO via the PRMP, boards (RMB/JRMB/ROMB/RWG), tools, tiered roles, and WBS/IMP/IMS/EVM/TPM integration. This is the DoD-acquisition complement to nasa-risk (general CRM/RIDM theory) and dau-se-guidebook (the SE process frame). Does NOT teach general risk theory from scratch, and defers specialized risk regimes (system safety/ESOH, HSI, detailed cyber/RMF, spectrum) to their own DoD instructions and the relevant packs.
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 FAA-STD-025f (Preparation of Interface Documentation). Use for IRD/ICD family definitions, common format and content, IRD shall-requirements, ICD design characteristics, verification/VRTM, and CM/revision/approval of FAA Enterprise Subsystem interfaces. Covers rev F preparation rules only; does not replace FAA-STD-005 drawing/spec prep, Order 1800.66 full CM procedures, or non-FAA interface standards.
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 process notes, a walkthrough or interview transcript, a transcript of a meeting recording or a stale existing procedure into a draft standard operating procedure: purpose and trigger, scope, definitions, roles with a RACI table, numbered steps with the check that closes each one, records produced, controls as stated, and open questions for the process owner. Every step traces to the source or reads UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "write an SOP from these notes", "turn this walkthrough into a procedure", "document how we do this", "draft the standard operating procedure for", "build a RACI for this process" or "tidy up this old procedure". Do not use for technical runbooks with commands and rollback, use runbook-drafter instead; for meeting minutes and action lists, use transcript-to-actions. 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 Data Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, data and AI governance risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CDO review", "pressure-test the data governance in this plan", "what would a CDO say about this", "check the metric definitions and data sources" or "prepare this for the data governance board". Do not use for security controls or third-party security risk, use ciso-reviewer instead; for contract, liability or regulatory terms, use general-counsel-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。
Manage organizational teams and professional roles in the NV oOS Pro Toolkit. Covers team creation, profession definitions, role assignments, and organizational structure. Use when setting up teams, defining professional roles, assigning users to teams, or managing organizational hierarchy.
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。
Design revenue operations across lifecycle stages, lead/account routing, scoring, handoffs, pipeline definitions, CRM hygiene and SLA measurement.
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。
Audit cross-platform attribution, conversion definitions, reporting windows, GA4, AdServices and AdAttributionKit, MMPs, browser and server events, offline conversions, and platform reconciliation. Use for attribution audit, attribution models, conversion windows, requests to add or total Meta and Google conversions, incompatible reporting-window aggregation, GA4 attribution, MMP review, AppsFlyer, Adjust, Branch, Singular, or cross-platform discrepancies.
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。
Enforces error handling standards: silent error prohibition, custom error class hierarchy (AppError base with category never-fallback / transient / permanent, cause preservation, ValidationError / UnauthorizedError / UpstreamError etc. — canonical definitions in PATTERNS.md), external-boundary normalization (normalizeExternalError), Result pattern (Result.ok/Result.fail), proper try-catch with error type checking, structured error logging with a single Logger contract, fallback prohibition categories (isNeverFallback), and HTTP status code mapping. Use when implementing error handling, reviewing catch blocks, or designing error responses.
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 working with Crossplane — crossplane Kubernetes-native infrastructure management. Covers managed resources, compositions, provider configurations, composite resource definitions (XRDs), claims, and provider health. Use when managing Crossplane resources, debugging provisioning failures, inspecting compositions, or auditing cloud resource status.
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 working with Azure Policy Deep — azure Policy deep compliance and governance management. Covers policy definitions, initiatives, assignments, compliance evaluation, exemptions, remediation tasks, custom policies, and regulatory compliance. Use when managing Azure governance at scale, reviewing compliance states, creating custom policies, or troubleshooting policy evaluation results.
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。
Design and optimize AI agent action spaces, tool definitions, and observation formatting for higher completion rates.
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。
Validates custom dotnet new templates for correctness before publishing. Catches missing fields, parameter bugs, shortName conflicts, constraint issues, and common authoring mistakes that cause templates to fail silently. USE FOR: checking template.json files for errors before publishing or testing, diagnosing why a template doesn't appear after installation, reviewing template parameter definitions for type mismatches and missing defaults, finding shortName conflicts with dotnet CLI commands, validating post-action and constraint configuration. DO NOT USE FOR: finding or using existing templates (use template-discovery), creating projects from templates (use template-instantiation), creating templates from existing projects (use template-authoring).
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。
Canonical patterns for writing custom MSBuild targets. Only activate in MSBuild/.NET build context. USE FOR: diagnosing and fixing custom target authoring anti-patterns, reviewing MSBuild target definitions for correctness, diagnosing broken SDK target chains across files (e.g., Directory.Build.targets silently redefining SDK targets), fixing targets that replace CompileDependsOn instead of extending it with $(CompileDependsOn), fixing query targets that return stale results due to Outputs vs Returns misuse, fixing missing Inputs/Outputs causing unnecessary rebuilds, fixing missing FileWrites registration. Covers DependsOnTargets vs BeforeTargets vs AfterTargets, the Build→CoreBuild three-level pattern, hooking into the build pipeline, the $(XxxDependsOn) chain-extension pattern. DO NOT USE FOR: incremental build tuning (use incremental-build), parallelization (use build-parallelism), general anti-patterns (use msbuild-antipatterns), non-MSBuild build systems.
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。
Project code patterns and conventions. Auto-loads when implementing, designing, verifying, or reviewing code. Provides detailed pattern definitions with code examples.
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。
Design and generate Convex database schemas with proper validation, indexes, and relationships. Use when creating schema.ts or modifying table definitions.
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 "identify web application vulnerabilities", "explain common security flaws", "understand vulnerability categories", "learn about injection attacks", "review access control weaknesses", "analyze API security issues", "assess security misconfigurations", "understand client-side vulnerabilities", "examine mobile and IoT security flaws", or "reference the OWASP-aligned vulnerability taxonomy". Use this skill to provide comprehensive vulnerability definitions, root causes, impacts, and mitigation strategies across all major web security categories.
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。
Performs GraphQL introspection attacks to Şunu çıkar: full API schema including types, queries, mutations, subscriptions, and field definitions from GraphQL endpoints. The tester uses introspection queries to map the attack surface, identifies sensitive fields and mutations, tests for query depth and complexity limits, and exploits GraphQL-specific vulnerabilities including batching attacks, alias-based brute force, and nested query DoS. Activates for requests involving GraphQL security testi...
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 security testing of SOAP web services by analyzing WSDL definitions and testing for XML injection, XXE, WS-Security bypass, and SOAPAction spoofing.
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。
Implements input and output validation guardrails for LLM-powered applications to prevent prompt injection, data leakage, toxic content generation, and hallucinated outputs. Builds a security validation pipeline using NVIDIA NeMo Guardrails Colang definitions, custom Python validators for PII Tespit and content policy enforcement, and the Guardrails AI framework for structured output validation. The guardrails system intercepts both user inputs (blocking injection attempts, stripping PII, ...
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。