863 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Creates a reusable use case specification file that defines the business problem, stakeholders, and measurable success criteria for model customization, as recommended by the AWS Responsible AI Lens. Use as the default first step in any model customization plan. Skip only if the user explicitly declines or already has a use case specification to reuse. Captures problem statement, primary users, and LLM-as-a-Judge success tenets.
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。
SOC 2 Type I and Type II compliance management against the Trust Services Criteria. Use for SOC 2 readiness assessments, TSC gap analysis, audit evidence collection, infrastructure control validation, and CPA firm audit preparation.
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。
Agile product ownership for backlog management and sprint execution. Use for writing user stories and acceptance criteria, planning sprints, estimating story points, breaking down epics, or prioritizing a backlog.
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 development from an executable specification with traceable requirement IDs and merge-time coverage gates. Use when starting a greenfield feature, reviving a stale spec, or gating merges on requirement coverage.
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。
GDPR Art. 35 Data Protection Impact Assessment with threshold checking, risk registers, and EDPB criteria scoring. Use for DPIA evaluations.
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 an influencer campaign brief: creator criteria, pay, approvals, disclosure. "write a brief for our influencer campaign"
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 custom LLM evaluation pipelines using the OpenJudge framework. Covers selecting and configuring graders (LLM-based, function-based, agentic), running batch evaluations with GradingRunner, combining scores with aggregators, applying evaluation strategies (voting, average), auto-generating graders from data, and analyzing results (pairwise win rates, statistics, validation metrics). Use when the user wants to evaluate LLM outputs, compare multiple models, design scoring criteria, or build an automated evaluation system.
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。
Risk-based vendor assessment framework for IT service providers, technology vendors, and third-party partners under DORA, NIS2, GDPR. Provides three-phase process (Initial Screening / Detailed Assessment / Final Evaluation), six-dimension risk scoring (Financial/Operational/Compliance/Security/Reputational/Strategic) with weighted matrices, full DORA Art. 28-30 contractual checklist, NIS2 Art. 21(2) security measures enumeration, GDPR Art. 28 documentation checks, red flags per dimension, trigger-based review criteria, and document templates. Use when: (1) Evaluating new vendors or technology providers, (2) Conducting critical ICT third-party due diligence under DORA, (3) Performing supply chain security assessment under NIS2, (4) Creating vendor onboarding documentation, (5) Establishing ongoing vendor monitoring, (6) Assessing concentration risk, or (7) Generating executive vendor risk reports.
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。
Expert Section 508 compliance advisor for US federal ICT accessibility. Use this skill whenever a user asks about Section 508, WCAG 2.0/2.1 AA for federal systems, VPAT or Accessibility Conformance Reports (ACR), accessibility audits, remediation planning, PDF accessibility, web or software accessibility, mobile accessibility, federal procurement accessibility requirements, contractor obligations, undue burden exceptions, assistive technology compatibility, or Section 508 testing. Covers the Revised Section 508 Standards (2018), all WCAG 2.0 Level AA success criteria, the four POUR principles, testing methodologies, and agency compliance workflows. Trigger even if the user doesn't say "skill" — any Section 508 or ICT accessibility question for federal systems should use this skill.
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。
Create original, competition-ready commercial mediation problems and confidential packets with iterative validation. Use when a user provides a topic, industry, dispute sketch, or existing general-information packet and wants a public packet plus confidential packets for both sides—or one named side. Build a narrow but workable settlement corridor; verify factual and numerical consistency, information asymmetry, balance, originality, and commercial feasibility; and revise until deterministic and semantic exit criteria pass. Do not use merely to summarize an existing packet or to advise parties in a real dispute. Requires local file access; Python 3 is recommended for bundled deterministic checks, with disclosed manual fallbacks when unavailable.
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 high-fidelity interactive legal assessment as a single self-contained HTML artifact. Output includes a live countdown timer, contract review tasks with hover-annotated problem clauses, candidate answer textareas, model answers hidden behind reveal blocks, scenario-based legal memo tasks, strategy and function-building questions, and a pre-submission checklist that encodes the marking criteria. Use when the user needs to (1) assess a legal candidate with a realistic timed exercise, (2) train or onboard junior lawyers using problem sets rather than doctrine, (3) help a candidate prepare for a real take-home assessment they are facing, (4) build educational materials for law students, in-house teams, or compliance training, or (5) produce scenario-based training modules on specific legal topics. Triggers on "legal test", "take-home", "mock exam", "contract redline exercise", "candidate assessment", "legal training exercise", "practice test", or similar phrasing even when informal.
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。
End-to-end external local counsel lifecycle management for multi-jurisdiction legal matters. LC selection criteria and capability assessment, engagement setup and instruction design, performance monitoring and check-in cadence, scope enforcement, and relationship escalation. Use when selecting local counsel for a jurisdiction, designing LC instructions, managing the LC check-in rhythm, enforcing scope boundaries when LC signals overreach, or escalating a performance or relationship issue beyond the matter team. Trigger on: 'which LC should we use', 'LC instruction', 'brief the local counsel', 'LC hasn't responded', 'LC is going off scope', 'LC scope dispute', 'confirm scope with LC', 'LC check-in', 'LC is slow', 'monitor the LC network', 'LC engagement letter', 'LC selection', 'what should we tell the local counsel', 'LC onboarding', 'LC performance issue', 'LC relationship problem'.
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。
Assess and classify legal risks using a severity-by-likelihood framework with escalation criteria. Use when evaluating contract risk, assessing deal exposure, classifying issues by severity, or determining whether a matter needs senior counsel or outside legal review.
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。
Assess and classify legal risks using a severity-by-likelihood framework with escalation criteria. Use when evaluating contract risk, assessing deal exposure, classifying issues by severity, or determining whether a matter needs senior counsel or outside legal review.
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。
Assess and classify legal risks using a severity-by-likelihood framework with escalation criteria. Use when evaluating contract risk, assessing deal exposure, classifying issues by severity, or determining whether a matter needs senior counsel or outside legal review.
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。
Routes between five assessment pathways — formative, rubric/criteria, authentic/performance, peer/self, and diagnostic — with validity and equity checks. Use when a teacher needs help choosing how to assess.
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。
Analyse student work against criteria to identify specific gaps between current performance and learning objectives. Use when reviewing submissions, planning feedback, or diagnosing learning needs.
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 a project-based learning brief with a driving question, milestones, and assessment criteria. Use when planning PBL units, inquiry projects, or extended investigations.
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。
Generate a criterion-referenced rubric with descriptive performance levels for a task or objective. Use for marking guides and general curriculum contexts. For Manning programmes where Competent = success, use coherent-rubric-logic-builder instead.
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。
Tags harness-decomposed curriculum items (KUDs, LTs, criteria) with a school's developmental band metadata while preserving source voice and labels. Supply the band schema; the skill derives mapping rules from it.
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 comprehensive Product Requirements Document from product plan. Creates PRD.md with features, user stories, acceptance criteria, and success metrics. Use when creating product requirements.
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。
把模糊诉求收敛成另一个 AI 能自主执行且可验收的 goal contract（scope / non-goals / success criteria / verification / stop conditions）。本 skill 只写目标契约，**绝不替用户执行任务**。触发硬条件：这份 goal 是要交给别人跑的——subagent、Codex、另一个 AI 会话或另一个人。用于写 goal、优化 goal、改 handoff prompt，或把"今天做完、尽量优化、帮我研究并执行"这类请求变成执行方不会乱猜、不会越界的任务契约。不适用于：自己团队的需求管理和版本拆解（用 issue-pool——它产出的是给人开工的 task，不是给 AI 的契约）、整页界面方案（用 page-solution-design）、PRD/验收标准/测试用例文档（用 prd-test-writer）、框架计划和版本路线（用 issue-pool）、以及用户其实是想让你**直接把这件事做了**的情况——那就直接做，不要走本 skill 把活变成一份文档。
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。
Framework for running single-variable cold email experiments. Defines experiment types (list-only, copy-only, combined), confidence weighting, minimum sample sizes, and success criteria. Use when the user wants to improve a campaign, test a new list vs old one, or compare copy variants. Prevents the
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。
Define a new category where your product wins by default. Reframe the buying decision. Triggers on: "create a category", "category design", "define my category", "category of one", "reframe the market", "position as category king", "new category", "category creation", "own a category", "category strategy", "competitive positioning", "strategic positioning", "market reframing", "be the only option", "change the buying criteria", "category king".
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。