「what」の検索結果

Audits your Cowork setup across five categories, scores each one, and gives you a prioritized improvement plan. For reviewing how well you are using Cowork, when optimizing your workspace configuration, or during a quarterly productivity review. Use when the user says "health check", "am I using cowork right", "optimize my setup", "cowork audit", "what am I missing", "is my setup good", or "how do I get more out of cowork".

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。

See the difference between Chat and Cowork with a live side-by-side comparison for understanding why Cowork is built differently. Use when evaluating AI tools, for comparing chat versus agent capabilities, during an AI tool decision, when switching from ChatGPT or Claude Chat, or when the user says "what is different about cowork", "cowork vs chat", "why not just use chatgpt", "show me the difference", "compare chat and cowork", or "why should I use cowork instead of chat".

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。

Review the UI and style files changed in the working tree against this repo's own design system, before they are saved or committed. Runs the same deterministic check as the CLI's --check flag (no tokens, about a second): hardcoded colours where a token exists, near-identical colour twins, off-scale spacing, radii, font sizes and shadows, typefaces outside the system, arbitrary Tailwind values, static inline styles, !important, duplicate component definitions and imports of the copy to avoid, new tokens that copy an existing one, chart colours written by hand where the repo keeps a chart palette (and one calm warning asking for a palette where it keeps none), on a repo built on MUI, Mantine, Chakra or Ant Design, colours or pixel sizes written onto kit components where the theme has a value, and on a Tailwind theme or a shadcn repo, palette classes such as text-gray-500 where the theme names a colour of that kind. Findings name the file, the line and the fix. This is the small, fast check for what just changed; the roast skill is the full scan of the whole repo with a report.

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 creating /goal directives, reusable testable outcome-oriented success standards for agentic workflows. Use whenever the user asks to create a goal, write a /goal directive, define what good looks like, set success criteria for an agent, define a reusable instruction, create a quality standard, write acceptance criteria for an agent workflow, or specify done conditions.

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。

Developer personality portrait generator. Supports subcommands: (1) 'generate my portrait' / 'analyze my personality' — full analysis; (2) 'update my portrait' — incremental update since last analysis; (3) 'install persona from <url>' — install community persona from GitHub; (4) 'list personas' / '我安装了哪些人格' — show installed; (5) 'remove persona <id>' — uninstall; (6) 'think like <name>' / '像<name>一样思考' — activate a persona. Also triggers on 'vibe-portrait', 'what kind of developer am I'.

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 critical Rust code reviews covering correctness, edition 2024 compliance, error handling, API design, async pitfalls, and dependency hygiene. ALWAYS use this skill when the user wants to review, audit, or critically evaluate Rust code — whether that's a PR diff, a specific crate or module, a cross-cutting concern like error handling, or the whole codebase. This includes requests to "review my changes", "check this code", "audit for best practices", "look for issues", "what's wrong with this", or "flag anything that could bite us". Use it even when the user doesn't say "review" explicitly but is asking you to find problems, inconsistencies, or anti-patterns in existing Rust code. Do NOT use for requests to write, fix, refactor, test, explain, or implement code — only for evaluating existing code.

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 evidence needs grading before anyone reasons from it — the user asks "how reliable is this?", "grade this source", "check this report", "can I trust this article?", "is this corroborated?", or hands over a URL, a pasted report or a Liberty91 event ahead of an ACH or assessment. The Quality of Information Check from the CIA Tradecraft Primer, adapted for vendor and press CTI reporting. Resolves each document to its originating source, splits it into claims, and grades every claim on two written elements, access level (how the source knows) and claim support (what backs the statement), with a stated rationale, using a fixed rubric with hard caps. The grade is not an Admiralty rating. Five outlets citing one vendor report count as one source; anything that cannot be traced to a primary is capped, not guessed. Returns a graded claim table, gaps, a deception screen and JSON. /ach, /threat-assessment and /writing-assessments run it first by default.

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 "what TLP should this be?", applying TLP markings to a finished product, or the tradecraft pipeline calls for TLP determination before sharing. Covers TLP v2.0 (CLEAR / GREEN / AMBER / AMBER+STRICT / RED).

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 CrowdStrike Falcon Intelligence on an indicator (IOC reputation for an IP, domain, hash, or URL — malicious confidence, linked actors, malware families, reports) OR on an adversary (threat-actor profile, origin/target search, MITRE ATT&CK TTPs, finished intel reports). Answers questions like "look up 1.1.1.1", "what TTPs does Charming Kitten use?", "which threat actors operate from Russia?", and "latest report on Mustang Panda". Commonly invoked by the four /*-investigation skills, /ioc-enrichment-workflow, /threat-actor-profiling, and the regional espionage cells. Other agents/skills can chain this for vendor-authoritative actor and finished-intel context. Requires a Falcon Intelligence subscription.

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。

Indicator pivoting methodology — how to use one known indicator to discover related infrastructure across the IOC graph. Decision tree by indicator type with concrete `/lookup-*` commands per pivot, a worked multi-hop example, pivot-quality scoring, and routing into the rigor pipeline. Use when the user asks "what else is connected to this IP / domain / hash / cert / actor?", needs to expand a single seed IOC into a campaign cluster, or wants the canonical reference for graph-walking IOCs.

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 you need to query an OpenCTI instance — is this IOC already known, what entities/reports/campaigns exist for an actor — or push new intel into it — creating indicators/observables, labelling, TLP markings, relationships, or importing a STIX 2.1 bundle. Two-way integration. Commonly invoked by /ip-investigation and friends to check whether an indicator is already in your knowledge base, and by analytical skills that want to publish their findings back to OpenCTI. Reads $OPENCTI_URL and $OPENCTI_TOKEN.

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 "what is coming next?", wants strategic forecasting, or is hunting weak signals of emerging threats before they materialise. Covers signal identification, trend analysis, and scenario development.

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 assessing the maturity of a CTI programme, the user asks "how mature is our CTI?" / "what should we improve next?", or wants a benchmark against the five-level model across six dimensions.

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 phrasing a forward-looking statement, the user asks "how likely is X?" / "what's the likelihood?", or the tradecraft pipeline applies a probability yardstick to a finished product. Standardised likelihood language across all products.

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 characterising a malware sample, the user asks "what does this binary do?" / "analyse this hash deeply", or `/hash-investigation` flags a novel sample warranting deeper review. Static + dynamic methodology, behavioural indicators, sandbox interpretation.

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 surfacing the assumptions underlying an analytical judgment, the user asks "what are we assuming?" / "are these assumptions still valid?", or before publishing a high-impact assessment. Standard SAT applied during major assessments.

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。

Flip core assumptions to reveal hidden constraints and alternative approaches - "what if the opposite were true?"

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。

Stop. That last message did not land: re-pitch 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。

Force unrelated concepts together to discover emergent properties - "What if we treated X like Y?"

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 a throwaway prototype to answer a design question. Use when the user wants to sanity-check whether a state model or logic feels right, or explore what a UI should look like.

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。

Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the project issue tracker: no interview, just synthesis of what you've already discussed.

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。

North star guidance for the agent-resources project. Use this skill to understand project context, get inspiration for development decisions, and resolve uncertainty about feature priorities or design choices. Reference when asking 'why does this project exist?' or 'what should we optimize for?'

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。