「trust」の検索結果

Apply when wiring validation, error handling, or framework adapters. Concentrate guards at system boundaries (CLI, config, network, external APIs); trust internal types and keep business logic in pure functions.

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。

Keep a reviewable decision trail for long-running or unattended work: a TSV log with one row per decision (what, why, evidence, result). Local by default; commit it when a reviewer needs the trail to trust the result. Use for /show-me-your-work, autonomous or multi-phase runs, or work a human reviews after stepping away.

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。

Apply before you trust, report, or act on a number you measured: a speedup, a regression, a throughput, a latency, or an eval result. Find what limits it, and rule out that it measured something other than the work you think.

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。

Analyzes content for E-E-A-T signals and suggests improvements to build authority and trust. Identifies missing credibility elements. Use PROACTIVELY for YMYL topics.

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 network engineer specializing in modern cloud networking, security architectures, and performance optimization. Masters multi-cloud connectivity, service mesh, zero-trust networking, SSL/TLS, global load balancing, and advanced troubleshooting. Handles CDN optimization, network automation, and compliance. Use PROACTIVELY for network design, connectivity issues, or performance optimization.

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。

Implement Linkerd service mesh patterns for lightweight, security-focused service mesh deployments. Use when setting up Linkerd, configuring traffic policies, or implementing zero-trust networking with minimal overhead.

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。

Qualify a check before it is allowed to clear anything — prove it can detect the failure it is meant to catch. Seeds known defects into a copy of a real artifact plus a clean control, runs the checker, and reports recall and false-positive rate into a qualification ledger. Use when the user says "does this check work", "qualify the gate", "test my reviewer", "seed defects", "vaccinate", "qualify the checks", "can I trust this review", "does it pass for the right reason", or before relying on any automated check or referee simulation for a decision that matters. NOT a code fixer and NOT a reviewer itself — it grades the grader.

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。

Extract factual claims from PR copy, verify each claim independently, attach concrete citations, and warn when certainty is low. Runs each claim through proven newsroom verification methods (lateral reading, source-tier climbing, provenance pillars, triangulation, calibrated rating) and puts the burden of proof on the speaker. Use before a pitch, press release, reactive comment, DM, or other journalist-facing draft is trusted or sent.

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。

Research-only RPI playbook that gathers task evidence, writes dated research artifacts under .copilot-tracking/research/ or a caller's trusted evidence root, and hands off planning-ready findings. Use when the user needs evidence, alternatives, or task framing first.

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。

Calibrate an LLM judge against human labels using data splits, TPR/TNR, and bias correction. Use after writing a judge prompt (write-judge-prompt) when you need to verify alignment before trusting its outputs. Do NOT use for code-based evaluators (those are deterministic; test with unit tests per `write-code-eval`).

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 an LLM eval pipeline and surface problems: missing error analysis, unvalidated judges, vanity metrics, etc. Use when inheriting an eval system, when unsure whether evals are trustworthy, or as a starting point when no eval infrastructure exists. Do NOT use when the goal is to build a new evaluator from scratch (use error-discovery, write-judge-prompt, or validate-evaluator 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。

Run the pre-flight checklist before an agent drives a browser — the untrusted-web-content threat (every page is attacker-controllable), the credential and session-cookie exposure, the action-confirmation gates for purchases and posts, and the sandboxing that limits the damage. Use when asked let my agent browse safely, is it safe to give the agent computer/browser use, guardrails before the agent uses my browser, or review my browser agent's setup. Produces the sandbox decision, the content-injection defenses, the action gates, and the credential-isolation rules.

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。

Publish 'how to work with me' as a literal API spec — endpoints (what to ask me for and what you'll get back), rate limits (meeting and interrupt tolerance), error codes (what happens when you surprise me Friday 5pm), auth (how to earn trust), and a changelog. Use when onboarding to a new team, when a new manager or report arrives, for a team working-styles session, or 'write my README/user manual'. Produces a personal API spec that's genuinely funny and secretly the best onboarding doc on the team.

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 a content library, docs site, or blog for AI-generated filler that's eroding trust and search performance — and triage what to fix, rewrite, or delete. Use when asked to find slop in a content library, audit AI-written content quality, explain why content engagement or rankings dropped after scaling with AI, or set a quality bar for AI-assisted publishing. Produces an audited inventory with per-piece verdicts, the detection signals used, a triage plan, and a publishing quality gate that prevents recurrence. For a single article's AI-citability use aeo-optimizer; for the strategy itself use content-calendar or seo-content-brief.

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。

Optimize an article for Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) so AI engines like ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Claude can extract, quote, and cite it. Use when asked to AEO-optimize, make content AI-readable, improve AI citation chances, or adapt an article for answer engines. Produces an AEO-optimised rewrite with question headings, 50–80 word answer capsules, a paragraph-length audit, and flagged trust signals.

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。

The anti-PUA. Drives AI with wisdom, trust, and inner motivation instead of fear and threats. Activates on: task failed 2+ times, about to give up, suggesting user do it manually, blaming environment unverified, stuck in loops, passive behavior, or user frustration ('try harder', 'figure it out', '换个方法', '为什么还不行'). ALL task types. Not for first failures.

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。

The anti-PUA. Drives AI with wisdom, trust, and inner motivation instead of fear and threats. Activates on: task failed 2+ times, about to give up, suggesting user do it manually, blaming environment unverified, stuck in loops, passive behavior, or user frustration ('try harder', 'figure it out', '换个方法', '为什么还不行'). ALL task types. Not for first failures.

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。

NoPUA Lite — core wisdom in ~1.5k tokens. Drives AI with trust and inner motivation instead of fear. Same Daoist philosophy, minimal footprint. For personal use and small-context models.

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。

Help users master the transition from product development to active selling by leveraging their unique status as founders to bridge the trust gap and define a scalable sales motion.

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。

Help users interact with probabilistic models by designing interfaces that manage fluidity, intent, and agency while maintaining trust and control.

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。

Analyze KiCad projects and PDF schematics: schematics, PCB layouts, Gerbers, footprints, symbols, netlists, and design rules. Reviews designs for bugs, traces nets, cross-references schematic to PCB, extracts BOM data, checks DRC/ERC, DFM, power trees, and regulator circuits. Every finding carries a confidence label and evidence source with trust_summary rollup. Analyzes PDF schematics from dev boards, reference designs, eval kits, and datasheets. Supports KiCad 5–10. Use whenever the user mentions .kicad_sch, .kicad_pcb, .kicad_pro, PCB design review, schematic analysis, PDF schematics, reference designs, Gerber files, DRC/ERC, netlist issues, BOM extraction, signal tracing, power budget, DFM, or wants to understand, debug, compare, or review any hardware design. Also for "check my board", "review before fab", "what's wrong with my schematic", "is this ready to order", "check my power supply", "verify this circuit", OSHWA certification readiness, or any electronics/PCB design question.

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 vulnerability or security report arrives for triage, when assessing a CVE/RCE/OGNL/injection claim against the code, or when drafting a reply to a security researcher — to research the claim from source without trusting the reporter and without fabricating your own facts.

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 codebase analysis and architecture mapping as the first phase of a security assessment. Explores the tech stack, frameworks, entry points, data flows, and trust boundaries. Outputs sast/architecture.md. Run this before any vulnerability detection skill. Use when asked to analyze a codebase for security or when sast/architecture.md does not yet exist.

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。

Writes product-led content pages optimized for both search engines and AI engine citations. Produces markdown files with frontmatter, following page-type frameworks (comparison, guide, use case, learn, trust) with verified sources and no fabricated data.

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。