4,168 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Structured threat assessment methodology. Intent + Capability + Opportunity = Threat Level. Use when formally evaluating a threat. Prefers graded evidence items from /quality-of-information-check and runs that skill first when handed raw URLs or text. Confidence is capped by the weakest load-bearing claim, and at Moderate when the evidence is ungraded.
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 the user asks to write a threat / risk / vulnerability assessment, or wants the appropriate template for each type. Distinct structures and section ordering per assessment kind. Prefers graded evidence items from /quality-of-information-check and runs that skill first when handed raw URLs or text. Confidence is capped by the weakest load-bearing claim, and at Moderate when the evidence is ungraded.
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。
Peer review checklist and quality standards for intelligence products, plus schema validation for graded evidence items and claim tables from /quality-of-information-check and /claim-extraction. Rejects outputs that break the evidence schema or the grading caps. Loaded by the quality-reviewer agent.
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。
Analysis of Competing Hypotheses — structured technique for evaluating multiple explanations against evidence. Use when facing ambiguous attribution or multiple plausible scenarios. Prefers graded evidence items from /quality-of-information-check and runs that skill first when handed raw URLs or text. Runs on ungraded evidence when asked, labelled as such, unweighted, and capped at Moderate confidence.
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 a report or article needs to be split into individual claims before it is graded, cited or used as evidence — the user asks "what does this report actually claim?", "split this into claims", "separate the facts from the judgements", or another skill needs a claim list. Turns one document into five to twelve atomic claims, each typed (observation, attribution, assessment, actor claim, victim disclosure) and anchored to the verbatim sentence it rests on, so every extraction can be checked against the source. Preserves the source's own hedging. Does not grade. Invoked by /quality-of-information-check; its output feeds /ach, /key-assumptions-check, /intelligence-writing, /writing-assessments and /threat-actor-profiling.
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 you need Liberty91 platform intelligence — what actually happened (deduplicated Threat Events with every source, Admiralty reliability/credibility and verification stage), whether an IOC is already known to your account, the canonical threat library (actors, malware, vulnerabilities, clusters, ATT&CK TTPs), alert matches, or which of your customer organizations an occurrence affects — or when you need to push intelligence back: ingesting your own report, generating an intelligence package, or uploading an organization document. Also supplies event provenance fields, when the platform returns them, and Threat Library alias resolution to /source-provenance and /quality-of-information-check. Two-way, first-party integration. Commonly invoked by /ip-investigation and friends, /ioc-enrichment-workflow, /threat-actor-profiling, /campaign-tracking and /vulnerability-intelligence. Reads $LIBERTY91_API_KEY.
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 the user asks for a KQL query, a Microsoft Sentinel / Defender / Azure Log Analytics detection or hunt, or wants to translate a finding from `/hash-investigation` / `/malware-analysis` into KQL. Format spec + writing 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。
Use when the task involves reading, creating, or editing `.docx` documents, especially when formatting or layout fidelity matters; prefer `python-docx` plus the bundled `scripts/render_docx.py` for visual checks.
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。
Comprehensive document creation, editing, and analysis with support for tracked changes, comments, formatting preservation, and text extraction. When Claude needs to work with professional documents (.docx files) for: (1) Creating new documents, (2) Modifying or editing content, (3) Working with tracked changes, (4) Adding comments, or any other document tasks
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 receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind 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。
Set up Husky pre-commit hooks with lint-staged (Prettier), type checking, and tests in the current repo. Use when user wants to add pre-commit hooks, set up Husky, configure lint-staged, or add commit-time formatting/typechecking/testing.
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。
Package entire code repositories into single AI-friendly files using Repomix. Capabilities include pack codebases with customizable include/exclude patterns, generate multiple output formats (XML, Markdown, plain text), preserve file structure and context, optimize for AI consumption with token counting, filter by file types and directories, add custom headers and summaries. Use when packaging codebases for AI analysis, creating repository snapshots for LLM context, analyzing third-party libraries, preparing for security audits, generating documentation context, or evaluating unfamiliar codebases.
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。
Searching internet for technical documentation using llms.txt standard, GitHub repositories via Repomix, and parallel exploration. Use when user needs: (1) Latest documentation for libraries/frameworks, (2) Documentation in llms.txt format, (3) GitHub repository analysis, (4) Documentation without direct llms.txt support, (5) Multiple documentation sources in parallel
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 receiving code review feedback (especially if unclear or technically questionable), when completing tasks or major features requiring review before proceeding, or before making any completion/success claims. Covers three practices - receiving feedback with technical rigor over performative agreement, requesting reviews via code-reviewer subagent, and verification gates requiring evidence before any status claims. Essential for subagent-driven development, pull requests, and preventing false completion claims.
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。
Automatic quality control, linting, and static analysis procedures. Use after every code modification to ensure syntax correctness and project standards. Triggers onKeywords: lint, format, check, validate, types, static analysis.
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。
Visual context analyzer for AI agents. Provides screenshots, accessibility scans, DOM snapshots, and element descriptions for web pages. Use when you need to see what a web page looks like, analyze accessibility issues, inspect DOM structure, or get detailed element information. Triggers on requests like "take a screenshot", "check accessibility", "what does this page look like", "analyze the UI", "inspect this element", or any visual/UI analysis task.
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。
Generates Claude Code plugin agent .md files: writes YAML frontmatter (name, model, color, tools, hooks, disallowedTools), crafts system prompts, and creates triggering example blocks with context and commentary. Validates agent structure against naming, length, and format constraints. Use when the user asks to create an agent, add an agent, write a subagent, configure agent frontmatter, design agent system prompts, set agent tools or colors, build an autonomous agent, or add agent hooks.
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。
Interactive element picker for web pages. Opens a browser with click-to-select UI overlay. Use when you need to let users visually select DOM elements, identify element selectors, or get detailed element information interactively. Triggers on "select an element", "pick element", "let me choose", "which element", or any interactive element selection task. Integrates with agent-eyes for visual context.
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。
Validate custom agent file format and structure
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。
Guides agents and users to create standards-compliant agent definitions using templates in markdown frontmatter format, ensuring context gathering, clarity, and proper metadata. Forces agents to ask clarifying questions when context is insufficient. Token-efficient documentation required. All content must be in English. Trigger: When creating a new agent definition, setting up project agents, or documenting agent workflows.
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。
Automates browser interactions for web testing, form filling, screenshots, and data extraction. Use when the user needs to navigate websites, interact with web pages, fill forms, take screenshots, test web applications, or extract information from web pages.
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 Forge's canonical verification chain (format:check + lint + typecheck + build + test). Use before claiming any task complete or opening a PR.
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。