4,122 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Guidance for using asc cli in this repo (flags, output formats, pagination, auth, and discovery). Use when asked to run or design asc commands or interact with App Store Connect via the CLI.
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。
Guidance for using asc cli in this repo (flags, output formats, pagination, auth, and discovery). Use when asked to run or design asc commands or interact with App Store Connect via the CLI.
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 800-37 Revision 2, the Risk Management Framework (RMF) for information systems and organizations. Use for the seven RMF steps (Prepare, Categorize, Select, Implement, Assess, Authorize, Monitor) and their tasks; the three-tier organization-wide risk model; authorization boundaries; the requirements-to-controls relationship; security categorization (FIPS 199/200 high-water mark) and control selection/tailoring (SP 800-53/53B baselines); assessment, the authorization decision and risk acceptance, continuous monitoring and ongoing authorization; the security/privacy distinction; and supply chain risk management. This is the security-and-privacy-risk-governance edge of systems engineering — it governs how much protection and whether to accept residual risk, complementing the disciplines that decide how protection is built. Does NOT reproduce the SP 800-53 control catalog or its baselines, the FIPS impact tables, or the ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 process text; it names and routes to them rather than restating them.
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 800-171 Rev. 3 (Protecting CUI in Nonfederal Systems). Use for CUI confidentiality requirements on contractors and other nonfederal organizations, the 17 requirement families, ODPs, SSPs, POA&Ms, and tailoring from SP 800-53. Covers 800-171r3 only; does not replace SP 800-171A assessment procedures, full SP 800-53 baselines, CMMC scoring mechanics, or classified-information controls.
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。
Knowledge base from the NASA Digital Engineering Acquisition Framework Handbook (NASA-HDBK-1004). Use for acquiring digital/model-based data under contract: the Data Requirements Description (DRD) instrument and the Appendix A DRD suite (TDP, MBx, CDMP, CSA, CR, FCA/PCA, SDT, EMDAL, REF, MRI); the Data Type 1-5 control scale; SOW/RFP/Cost-Volume contract language and data rights (FAR/DFARS, Table 3 license categories); the Requirements Exchange Format (REF/ReqIF, UUID schema) and Master Records Index; model-based data definition (MBSE, CAD/PMI, M&S credibility, BOM, release-state mapping, PLM); digital data collaboration, the four owned architectures, and interoperability standards (MIL-STD-31000, STEP/ISO 10303, ASME Y14); the four MBE interoperability use cases; and MBE Plan development. Scope is the acquisition and contracting side of digital engineering. Does not reproduce ISO/STEP/ASME/MIL-STD/SAE standard text, and the companion NASA-HDBK-1009A carries the deeper digital-engineering practitioner detail this handbook defers to.
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 DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF) 2.02 — Volume II: Architectural Data and Models. Use for DoDAF viewpoints, DM2 meta-model, capability modeling, operational architecture, systems architecture, services architecture, data/information modeling, standards compliance, project/portfolio integration, and fit-for-purpose model selection. Does not cover DoDAF Volume I (policy/governance) or Volume III (enterprise-level guidance); also does not substitute for the live DISR or DARS registries.
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 Human Factors Design Standard (HF-STD-001B, 2016) — the FAA's consolidated human-factors / human-systems-integration design criteria for systems it manages, operates, or maintains. Use for requirement-level design rules on: general human-factors design principles; automation and function allocation; designing equipment for maintenance; displays, controls, and visual indicators; alarms, audio, and voice communications; the computer-human interface (information presentation, coding, interaction styles, windows, dialogue); keyboards, input devices, and workstation/workplace ergonomics; system security, personnel safety, environment, anthropometry, and user documentation; plus intended-use and tailoring guidance. It is a quantified, source-attributed synthesis (heavily citing MIL-STD-1472G, MIL-HDBK-759C, DOD-HFDG-ATCCS, NUREG-0700, NASA-STD-3000, ANSI, OSHA, ISO 9241). Complements nasa-hsi as a parallel HSI tradition from the civil-aviation domain. Scope limits: it is design criteria, NOT an HSI lifecycle/process model (use nasa-hsi, nasa-npr-7123, or dau-se-guidebook for process); it does NOT reproduce the third-party standards it cites; it is FAA-acquisition-oriented (ATC, towers, TRACONs, airway facilities), not a general consumer-UX guide; and it is thin on modern touchscreen/mobile, web, and AI-driven interface patterns and on quantitative human-reliability 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。
Knowledge base from the FAA Requirements Engineering Management Handbook (DOT/FAA/AR-08/32). Use for writing requirements for real-time, embedded control systems — the avionics/medical slant — via the Handbook's eleven recommended practices: system overview and boundary (monitored/controlled variables), operational concepts (use cases), environmental assumptions, change-tolerant functional architecture (dependency diagrams), safety-driven architecture revision (FHA/PSSA/fault tree), system modes, detailed behavior and performance requirements (ideal value + tolerance + latency), the four-variable model bridge to software requirements (MON/CON/NAT/REQ, IN'/REQ'/OUT', DO-178B mapping), subsystem allocation, and rationale. Carries the Isolette Thermostat and Flight Control System worked examples. Slanted toward control systems with sensors and actuators; thin on information-system / enterprise / agile requirements, on requirements-management tooling, and on the formal-methods internals of SCR/RSML/SpecTRM (it names them, does not re-teach them). Does not reproduce the IEEE/DO-178B/ARP standards it cites.
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。
Erkennt Nutzeraufträge der Form "hole aus einem Ordner immer bestimmte Dateien und sammle sie an einem Ziel" und richtet dafür das Modul file-collect-sort-action (CLI fcsa) ein — ein konfigurationsgetriebener Agent, der Ordner scannt, Dateien per Schablone kategorisiert und gestufte Aktionen anwendet (move/copy/duplicate-check/delete/OCR/place-information). Nutze diesen Skill bei Sätzen wie "hole aus <Ordner> immer <Dateiart> und sammle sie in <Ziel>", "sortiere den Ordner X automatisch nach ...", "sammle eingehende Dateien aus ... in ...", "räume diesen Ordner regelbasiert auf" oder "verschiebe alle <Dateiart> aus <Ordner> automatisch". Richtet IMMER zuerst einen Dry-Run ein und schaltet erst nach ausdrücklichem Nutzer-Go scharf; Löschen bleibt grundsätzlich im _trash-Modus.
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。
Extrem kurzes, substantielles Ausgabe-FORMAT fuer EINE Entscheidung oder Entscheidungsgruppe, wenn die dahinterstehende Analyse bereits existiert (im Chat entstanden, aus `decide`, aus `decision-briefing`, aus einem Ticket oder Dokument): Kontext in 2-3 Zeilen, Pro/Contra je Option als Stichpunkte im paveman/caveman-reduzierten Stil, Talking Points, eine begruendete Empfehlung, und ein Pfad/Link zur Vollanalyse zum Komplett-Nachlesen. Nutze diesen Skill bei "gib mir das kurz mit Pro Contra und Empfehlung", "executive summary zur Entscheidung", "kurzkontext zu <Thema>", "fass die Entscheidung X in einer Kurzform zusammen", /decision-shot, oder wenn ein Ergebnis an jemanden weitergereicht werden soll, der nur die Essenz braucht, nicht die volle Herleitung. NICHT nutzen, um viele offene Entscheidungen zu SAMMELN und per Buchstabe abzufragen -- das macht decision-briefing; NICHT nutzen, um eine Entscheidung erst zu ANALYSIEREN -- das macht decide. decision-shot setzt eine fertige Analyse voraus und komprimiert nur deren Praesentation.
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。
Ordnet freiwillig bereitgestellte Gesundheitsinformationen und bereitet Fragen für Fachpersonen vor.
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 the instructions text and skills of a declarative agent, with its stated capabilities, knowledge sources and audience, for prompt-injection exposure, data-leakage paths, over-broad permissions and missing refusals, and returns an attack-surface map, a findings table with severity, quoted evidence and attack path, one pasteable fix per finding, a probe pack the owner can run and a refusal-coverage table. Use when the user asks to "red-team this agent", "check these instructions for prompt injection", "could this agent leak data", "review the permissions on my agent" or "what should this agent refuse". Do not use for checking a SKILL.md against the format rules, use skill-file-reviewer instead; do not use for designing the launch test set, use agent-evaluation-plan 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。
Turns one meeting transcript, recording recap or set of raw notes into concise DRAFT minutes returned in the chat as a single Markdown document: header metadata, attendance and apologies, agenda items each with a short neutral summary and outcome, numbered decisions with an owner, numbered action items with owner and due date, open questions, carried-over actions and the next-meeting line, every entry backed by a short verbatim source fragment and every missing fact marked UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "write the minutes", "draft minutes from this transcript", "turn these notes into meeting minutes", "produce the minutes of meeting for today's call", "tidy my rough minutes into the standard format" or "prepare the minutes for circulation". Do not use for extracting action items, task lists or per-owner follow-up emails alone, use transcript-to-actions 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。
Drafts the instructions field of a declarative agent that orchestrates a set of custom skills, under a character cap (default 8,000), from the skills' names and descriptions: role and scope, one routing rule per skill, workflow order, gates written as workflow holds, global rules, output format and what the agent never does. Returns the text in a fenced block with its character count labelled counted or estimated, plus a skill inventory, routing table, gate table, rules trace and open questions for the owner. Use when the user asks to "write the instructions for my agent", "draft a system prompt that ties these skills together", "tighten these agent instructions to fit the cap", "how should the agent route between these skills" or "revise my agent's orchestration text". Do not use to review a single SKILL.md, use skill-file-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。
Builds a DRAFT content calendar for a stated period from the themes, channels, cadence rules, fixed dates and owners the user provides: one dated row per planned item with theme, channel, format, working title, owner, status and source, plus a cadence check with its arithmetic, theme balance, owner load and the slots left open. Use when the user asks to "build the content calendar for Q4", "lay these themes onto dates", "plan a month of posts across our channels", "extend the editorial calendar" or "check this calendar against our cadence". Do not use for deciding what the campaign says or why it runs, use campaign-brief-builder instead; for writing the items themselves, use announcement-drafter or internal-newsletter-drafter. 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 plain-language requests (emails, chat messages, form submissions, meeting asks, voicemail or call notes) into one intake record per request (what is asked, who asks and for whom, urgency as evidenced, category, suggested owner, missing information with draft clarifying questions) and a triage table sorted for the operations lead to act on. Use when the user asks to "log these requests", "triage this pile of asks", "turn this message into an intake record", "who should own this request", "what is missing before we can start" or "build today's intake list". Do not use for customer support tickets, use ticket-triage-pack instead; for clearing a personal mailbox by reply bucket, use inbox-triage. 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 one SKILL.md against the format rules and returns a findings table: strict YAML front matter with exactly name and description, name equal to the folder, description as the trigger, the eight-heading skeleton, capability-neutral wording, safety boundaries. Each finding carries severity, rule identifier, location, quoted evidence and replacement text; the verdict READY, REVISE or BLOCKED is an apparent state and the owner decides. Use when the user asks to "review this SKILL.md", "check my skill file before upload", "lint this skill description", "validate the front matter of this skill" or "score this skill folder". Do not use to write an agent's instructions field, use agent-instructions-drafter instead; for injection or leakage exposures use agent-instructions-red-team; for launch tests use agent-evaluation-plan. 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。
Prepares a DRAFT management-of-change intake record from a change description (email, meeting note, marked-up drawing or request form): what changes from what to what and where, the identifiers named, the candidate affected documents matched against the register, the disciplines to consult with the reason for each, and the numbered questions reviewers must answer, with UNKNOWN wherever the description is silent. Prepares the record only: never approves, classifies the change, decides replacement in kind or makes any hazard or safety judgement. Use when the user asks to "raise an MoC for this", "prepare the change request intake", "which documents does this change touch", "who needs to review this change" or "draft the MoC form from this email". Do not use for tracking who owes information to whom across disciplines, use interface-register-builder 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。
Proposes tag and number structures for the new lines and instruments in a P&ID draft according to the project's numbering procedures, checks every tag extracted from the PFD against the quoted procedure format, and lists cross-section identifier mismatches and the registry checks a human must run. Never invents a numbering convention, never alters a PFD tag and never assigns a sequence number the procedure reserves for the registry. Use when the user asks to "run the tagging and numbering section", "check the tags against the numbering procedure", "propose the tag structure for the new lines and instruments" or "list the registry checks before validation" after the process safety flags. Do not use for validating the four sections, use validation-and-review-package instead; do not use for instrument content, use instrumentation-and-control-enrichment. 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。
Builds a DRAFT interface register between disciplines or parties from meeting notes, action lists and drawings or document lists: one row per interface with the requesting and providing party, the information needed, the related document number, the need-by date with its source, the status as minuted and a quoted source, plus UNKNOWN and questions where the notes are silent. Never sets a date, rates priority, assigns ownership beyond what the notes state or closes an interface. Use when the user asks to "build an interface register from these minutes", "list the interfaces between piping and civil", "who owes what to whom on this package", "update the interface register from this week's meeting" or "turn these action items into an interface list". Do not use for recording a design or document change raised in a meeting, use management-of-change-intake 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 plan in character as a Chief Information Security Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review with a verdict, findings cited to specific passages, security and compliance risks and the five interrogation questions a real CISO would ask. Use when the user asks to "run a CISO review", "pressure-test the security of this plan", "what would our CISO say about this" or "check the privacy and third-party risk". Do not use for contract, liability or regulatory-interpretation reviews, use general-counsel-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。
Work with SuperCollider projects as files - the shape of a .scd piece, how to read and write one with sc_project, how to send the file that is on disk into the live session with sc_load, what state belongs in the session and what belongs in the file, and how to package a piece the SuperCollider way (a folder with its .scd, its SynthDefs, and a Quark-style layout) instead of inventing a format.
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。