4,061 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Run a research project as a folder on disk — open the run root first, record the user's own instruction verbatim, open the two frame gates and stop for the human to answer them, and keep the stage the ledger says it is. Use when the user asks to start, resume or check a research run, a paper, a review, a brief, a report, a literature review or a protocol.
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 the document of a research run — plan the question and the outline with rs_plan, write prose and declare its claims together with rs_write, choose the claim strength the evidence actually holds, follow the section structure the run's kind maps to, read the draft back, and build a watermarked draft before the gated clean build. Use when a run's document has to be written, a section drafted, a claim bound to a source, or a build attempted.
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。
암묵적 의존성(전역 변수·클래스 필드·싱글턴 접근)을 명시적 파라미터로 전환하여 메서드 투명성 향상. "숨은 의존성 드러내", "필드 대신 파라미터로", "전역 참조 제거", "/explicit-parameters" 요청 시 사용. 단, 파라미터가 많아져 묶어야 하면 /introduce-parameter-object, I/O와 계산 분리는 /segregate-functional-core가 적합. /explicit-parameters [commit-ref]로 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。
값 반환과 부수효과가 혼재된 메서드를 Query(순수)와 Modifier(부수효과)로 분리(CQS). "쿼리와 명령 분리", "getter가 상태를 바꿔", "CQS", "/separate-query-modifier" 요청 시 사용. 단, I/O 전체를 계산에서 떼어내는 것은 /segregate-functional-core가 적합. /separate-query-modifier [commit-ref]로 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。
Mitigate incidental code complexity when control flow is tangled, nesting is deep, names are hard to parse, or reasoning requires cross-file hops. Use when a review stalls on readability, you need an analysis-first refactor plan before edits, or you want essential-vs-incidental verdicts, ranked simplification steps, a small structural sketch, and a TRACE assessment (analysis-only; no edits).
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。
Mine a codebase for breakthrough, evidence-backed opportunities — features, additions, refactors, simplifications, DX, UX, reliability, performance, or architecture cleanup. Researches project reality first, then forces two escalation gates (reject the merely-adequate idea; expand ambition 10x then collapse to the smallest proof-bearing artifact). Outputs ranked opportunities, an escalation ledger, and one plan seed. Does not implement or create tickets.
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, measurement-driven performance optimization for latency, throughput, memory/GC, and tail behavior. Use when the user asks to optimize/speed up, reduce latency (p95/p99), increase throughput/QPS, lower CPU/memory/allocations/GC pauses, profile hot paths, or run a benchmarked perf pass (including JSONL/query-heavy code). Requires before/after measurement on a runnable workload (or an explicit `UNMEASURED` plan) plus a correctness gate.
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 a targeted fresh-eyes blunder pass over code, specs, plans, reviews, closure gates, or skill edits. Use when asked to reread with fresh eyes, find obvious bugs, catch mistakes/oversights/omissions, check for embarrassing misses, or do a second independent pass before closure. Use it as the final falsification/check pass for another workflow, not as a substitute for implementation or verification.
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。
Investigate latency, freezes, memory growth, hitches, dropped frames, or perceived slowness with reproduction and instrumentation before optimizing.
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 asked to review a local diff/change set for correctness, regressions, blast radius, affected flows, and missing tests using the knowledge graph; use `review-pr` for intent/checklist/merge-gate evidence.
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 for pre-PR self-review or pull-request review that must verify the matched intent, allowed scope, required tests/docs, forbidden actions, architecture gates, and merge readiness; not for a general code-quality diff review alone.
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 for Blazor/MudBlazor component or page changes involving render modes, dialogs, parameters/events, HAL-gated actions, generated API clients or generated record consumption, theming, or component tests; add accessibility or CSS-isolation only when touched.
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 NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods (NIST HB 151) — the practical statistics reference for engineering, metrology, and quality. Use for: exploratory data analysis and the four univariate assumptions (4-plot); measurement process characterization including bias/precision, calibration designs, gauge R&R, and ISO/GUM uncertainty budgets; production process characterization (stability vs. capability); process modeling and regression (LS/WLS/NLS/LOESS); design of experiments (screening, fractional/factorial, response-surface, Taguchi); statistical process control (Shewhart/CUSUM/EWMA charts, capability indices, acceptance sampling); product/process comparisons (hypothesis tests and confidence intervals for 1/2/3+ groups, ANOVA, multiple comparisons); and reliability (lifetime & repair-rate models, accelerated testing, reliability growth). Scope limits: this is applied frequentist statistics for measurement and quality — it does NOT reproduce the per-distribution formula galleries, worked case studies, datasets, plot images, or Dataplot/R code of the original web Handbook (those are described, not copied); it is thin on modern machine learning, Bayesian methods beyond conjugate reliability priors, time-series/forecasting, and Bayesian experimental 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。
Knowledge base from NASA-STD-8729.1A — NASA's R&M (Reliability and Maintainability) standard covering spaceflight and support systems (Revision A, 2017-06-13). Use for NASA's objectives-driven R&M framework — the R&M objectives hierarchy (one Top Objective decomposed into four sub-objectives, paired with tailorable strategies), how R&M requirements are established inside the SMA Plan required by NPR 7120.5, the SMA Technical Authority concurrence/independent-evaluation governance, milestone vs. readiness review gates, the reliability/maintainability/availability vocabulary (Ai vs. Ao, the failure causal chain, risk as a triplet), and the R&M Evidentiary Methods catalogue (FMEA/FMECA, FTA, RBDA, RCM, LORA, plus the space-environment and parts-pedigree analyses). Scoped to NASA spaceflight and support systems and to assurance planning: it is an objectives-and-strategies standard, so it deliberately does NOT prescribe step-by-step analysis procedures (those live in the referenced NASA Preferred Reliability Practices) and is thin on facility R&M, detailed math/derivations, and non-NASA 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 DAFMAN 63-119 (15 April 2021), Mission-Oriented Test Readiness Certification. Use for continuous MOTRC replacing single-point OTRR thinking: framework/applicability, Certification Official vs PM roles, review cycle and exit criteria, certification memo/decertify gates, DT&E/contractor evidence, ITT integration and cyber resiliency, and the 31-template matrix. DAF T&E readiness process only—does not replace DoDI 5000.89, AFI 99-103, or multi-service lead policies.
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 M&Q BoK (the Manufacturing and Quality Engineering Body of Knowledge), v3.0 of July 2025, published by OUSD(R&E). Use for the manufacturing-and-quality view of the defense acquisition life cycle: what M&Q engineers do across the Adaptive Acquisition Framework phases (Pre-MDD, Materiel Solution Analysis, Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction, Engineering and Manufacturing Development, Production and Deployment, Operations and Support); the twelve M&Q threads (A–L) built on the '5 Ms'; manufacturing feasibility and producibility; Manufacturing Readiness Levels and assessments; Key/Critical Characteristics and process capability (Cp/Cpk, SPC); the standards stack (AS6500, AS9100/ISO 9001, AS9103, AS9145); technical reviews (ASR/PDR/CDR/PRR) and milestone gates; DCMA surveillance; industrial base and supply chain; and sustainment (LCSP, IPS, ILA, ISR). Scope is DoD acquisition M&Q practice on the Major Capability Acquisition path — it is a best-practice compilation, not policy, and is thin on detailed shop-floor process engineering, contract law, and the full text of the cited industry standards (which it names but does not reproduce).
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 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 the DoD Digital Engineering Strategy (2018, OUSD/ODASD(SE)). Use for the Department of Defense's five digital engineering goals — (1) formalize the development, integration, and use of models; (2) provide an enduring authoritative source of truth; (3) incorporate technological innovation; (4) establish supporting infrastructure and environments; (5) transform the culture and workforce — plus their focus areas, the document-to-model and design-build-test→model-analyze-build shifts, model formalisms/provenance, governance and access control of the authoritative source of truth, and the coordinate→plan→pilot→sustain rollout. A vision-and-policy strategy, deliberately non-prescriptive. Does NOT provide a how-to method, tool tutorials, MBSE/SysML mechanics, or implementation-plan content; thin on metrics, acquisition-policy detail, and step-by-step procedure. Excludes the CAC-gated Digital Engineering Body of Knowledge (DEBoK).
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 relentless interview to sharpen a plan or design. Use when the user says "grill me", "grill mich", "grill mich zu diesem Plan", or explicitly invokes /grill-me. Does NOT fire on generic "review this", "poke holes", "stress-test", "devil's advocate" or "critique" phrasing -- for reviewing an already-written artifact (code, PR, paper) use code-review, 3agenten-review, 7phasen-review or caveman-review instead; grill-me interrogates a still-open plan or idea before it is built.
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。
Metakognitive Injektoren und Selbstgesprächs-Strategien (Self-Talk, Metacognitive Auditing, Evaluator Hooks, Pre-Flight Checklists, State Persistence & Personas). Integriert Aktive Informationssuche (Systemgedächtnis Gardener & USMC), Rehearsal (Aktives Abrufen & Wiedergeben), Baddeleys Arbeitsgedächtnis (State + Hooks), Miyake Exekutivfunktionen sowie CBT/ACT therapeutische Strategien.
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。
Baut aus einem Chatverlauf oder aus bestehenden Automatisierungs-Prompts (z. B. eines anderen Agenten-Systems) eine selbstlaufende, user-neutrale Workflow-Automatisierung: einen wiederkehrenden Prompt bzw. Automations-Skill für Cron/Schedule/Loop. Alias: automations-extractor. Nutze diesen Skill bei „mach daraus eine Automatisierung", „das soll regelmäßig/nächtlich laufen", „extrahiere Workflows aus diesen Chatverläufen/Automationen", „Automation aus dieser Session bauen", oder bei `/workflow-extract`. Ergänzt fehlende Automations-Bausteine (Rotations-Auswahl, Check-Registry, Idempotenz, Log-Hygiene, Freigabe-Gate, Eskalations-Handoff, Monitor-Meldedisziplin) systematisch. Enthält auch den Fleet-Audit-Modus: bestehende Automations-Flotten auf Silent-Failures, Redundanz, Drift und Lücken prüfen („prüfe meine Automatisierungen/Scheduled Tasks/Cron-Jobs"). Soll stattdessen ein abrufbarer Skill (Fähigkeit auf Zuruf) entstehen, den Schwester-Skill skill-extractor nutzen.
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。
Bindet das model-agnostische Computer-Use-Modul open-compute (Screenshot-Wahrnehmung, Windows-UIA-Elementklicks, sicherheitsgegatete Aktionen) fuer ALLE Agenten des Systems ein -- Claude Code, Codex und agy/Antigravity. Nutzen, wenn ein Dienst eine interaktive GUI- oder Browser-Aktion braucht, die kein reiner Text-/API-Weg loesen kann (Paradebeispiel: Tailscale-Reauth im Browser, sonstige Login-/Consent-Dialoge, Dialogfenster-Klicks). Standard ab 2026-08-02: open-compute statt Aufgeben oder Abwarten nutzen.
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。