4,129 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Evaluate project deliverables (code, docs, config) and calculate a 0-100 completeness score with weighted criteria and prioritized action items. Use when assessing project readiness, reviewing milestones, or identifying gaps before release.
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。
Professional business analysis skill aligned with BABOK® Guide v3 standards. Use this skill when you need to elicit and document requirements, analyze business processes, conduct stakeholder analysis, develop business cases, perform gap analysis, or create business requirements documents (BRD). Ideal for requirements gathering, process mapping (BPMN), financial analysis (ROI, NPV), stakeholder engagement, and solution evaluation. Triggers: "gather requirements", "create business case", "analyze process", "stakeholder analysis", "gap analysis", "BRD", "functional requirements", or requests involving business analysis tasks.
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 evaluating a completed or in-progress project across scope, correctness, quality, testing, and learning outcomes using structured Praise-Critique-Grow feedback.
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 evaluating, designing, drafting, revising, stress-testing, or preparing academic articles, empirical research reports, literature reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, journal submissions, reviewer responses, research methods, sampling, measurement, analysis, publication readiness, or citation/source audits.
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 designing, evaluating, documenting, modernizing, reviewing, refactoring, or implementing software architecture and code-level structure, including requirements, context, architecture style selection, microservices patterns, WebAssembly/WASI/Component Model, UMA portable capabilities, runtime contracts, capability graphs, governed MCP/agent orchestration, clean code, code smells, Rust crate/library API architecture, Cargo feature/MSRV/SemVer policy, unsafe/FFI/no_std/library testing, modularity, views, NFR tactics, IAM/auth, security patterns, cost estimation, architecture-as-code fitness functions, ADR/RFC work, and engineering execution plans.
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。
Concrete remediation proposal with Safe Harbour confidence — version bump, inline as first-party code, patch, workaround, or advisory. Use when applying a fix for a triaged CVE, evaluating fix-type trade-offs across registry / source / distro patches, producing rollback-safe manifest edits with dry-run verification, or generating a CycloneDX SBOM after the fix lands.
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。
Dockerfile / Containerfile / compose analysis plus optional Trivy / Grype / Syft composition when those binaries are present. Use when reviewing a Dockerfile PR, gating `docker build`, building an image SBOM, evaluating base-image risk, or auditing a registry image for CVEs.
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 evaluating an Islamic software feature, provider policy, AI behavior, moderation, monetization, privacy, defaults, ranking, self-hosting, or deployment model for provider responsibility and Islamic value-sensitive design; not for generic fiqh rulings or ordinary technical implementation.
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。
Econometrics skill for Difference-in-Differences (DID) analysis. Activates when the user asks about: "difference in differences", "DID", "DiD", "diff-in-diff", "parallel trends", "treatment group", "control group", "pre-treatment", "post-treatment", "policy evaluation", "natural experiment", "staggered DID", "event study regression", "two-way fixed effects DID", "callaway santanna", "sun and abraham", "双重差分", "倍差法", "平行趋势", "处理组", "对照组", "政策评估", "事件研究", "交错DID", "渐进处理"
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 System Safety Handbook Volume 2 (NASA/SP-2014-612). Use for risk-informed safety cases (RISC), integrated safety analysis (ISA), adequate safety concepts, safety objectives and requirements, acquirer/provider roles, graded safety analysis, claims-evidence-argument structure, SSMP development, and RISC evaluation. Does not cover nuclear or chemical safety domains, occupational health regulations, or NASA-specific programmatic requirements beyond system safety.
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 Test & Evaluation Enterprise Guidebook (August 2022 edition 8.02) with DOT&E-facing enterprise emphasis. Use for T&E enterprise roles (DOT&E vs USD(R&E)), DT&E/OT&E/LFT&E, cybersecurity T&E, MOSA/automation/digital enablers, suitability/reliability growth, and TEMP/Strategy/STE planning. Distinct routing from dod-te-guidebook (same guidebook family, pathway-deep pack). Guidance only—defer to DoDI 5000.89 and Title 10 for binding 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。
Knowledge base from the GAO Technology Readiness Assessment Guide (GAO-20-48G, 2020). Use for evaluating technology maturity in acquisition programs and projects: Technology Readiness Levels (TRL 1–9) and related scales (MRL, IRL), identifying Critical Technology Elements (CTEs), the five-step process for a high-quality TRA, the four characteristics of a reliable TRA (comprehensive, well-documented, credible, defensible), Technology Maturation Plans (TMPs), and using TRA results in knowledge-based, milestone decisions. Assessment/maturity oriented: it measures readiness and frames risk — it is not a full SE process model, cost-estimating, or schedule guide (see sibling packs for those).
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 System Safety Handbook (Dec 30, 2000). Use for system safety as a specialty within systems engineering: the five-step safety risk management process (mandated by FAA Order 8040.4 and the AMS), the severity-by-likelihood risk matrix and acceptance bands, the Safety Order of Precedence, system-description models (5M, SHEL(L)), the hazard-analysis activities (PHL/PHA/RHA/SSHA/SHA/O&SHA/HHA), integrated system hazard analysis, the analysis techniques (FTA, FMEA/FMECA, Fault Hazard, Common Cause, Sneak Circuit, Energy Trace), closed-loop hazard tracking (Safety Action Record), and the specialty domains the handbook covers — acquisition-lifecycle safety and contracting (OSA/CSA/SSPP/ISSPP), software safety (control-capability ranking, SHCM, DO-178B), test & evaluation safety, facilities safety, commercial launch safety (AST licensing, expected casualty, MPL/DAMP), system safety training, and Operational Risk Management (ORM) with human/organizational factors. Scope limits: this is a year-2000 FAA how-to; it predates the modern FAA/ICAO Safety Management System (SMS) and Just Culture regulatory frameworks, and many cited orders, advisory circulars, and launch-licensing rules have since been restructured. It is FAA/NAS-centric, leans on MIL-STD-882C, and does not define the SE life-cycle processes themselves (use nasa-npr-7123 / dau-se-guidebook) or reproduce third-party standard text (MIL-STD-882, DO-178B, ISO/IEC/IEEE).
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 pack from 'Towards Digital Engineering: The Advent of Digital Systems Engineering' (Huang et al., Old Dominion University, arXiv:2002.11672, 2020). Use when reasoning about digital engineering, the DoD Digital Engineering Strategy and its five goals, the Authoritative Source of Truth, digitalization vs. digitization, digital augmentation, digitalized models, provenance, unique identification, and the four-level (vision/strategy/action/foundation) DSE research framework. Covers the conceptual/vision layer of the field. SCOPE LIMITS: this is a single ~28-page vision paper, not a methods handbook — it is thin on step-by-step procedures, tooling, case studies, and quantitative evaluation, and it predates 2020 so it does not cover later digital-engineering standards or recent AI/LLM advances. Use the sebok pack for established SE canon and MBSE depth.
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。
Structured problem solving in 6 steps: Problem definition, goals, brainstorming, evaluation, implementation, and 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。
Resolución estructurada de problemas en 6 pasos: Definición del problema, objetivos, lluvia de ideas, evaluación, implementación y revisión.
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。
Procedimiento estructurado de 6 pasos para mejorar, renovar o reconstruir pipelines existentes, carpetas de proyectos individuales, estructuras de documentación o stacks de software. Direccionable como "pipeline optimizer" (para pipelines temáticos completos, p. ej. de software, investigación o desarrollo de videojuegos) o "project-folder optimizer" (para carpetas de proyectos individuales dentro de un pipeline, p. ej. una herramienta de software o proyecto de artículo académico). Se activa ante tareas como "mejorar pipeline X", "optimizar el stack", "reconstruir Y", "renovación", "refactorización de pipeline", "limpiar carpeta de proyecto", "mejorar estructura de carpetas", "unificar convenciones", "consolidación de documentación", "integrar en sistema existente" o cualquier intervención sustancial en estructuras establecidas. Proporciona análisis del estado actual, aclaración del propósito, boceto del estado ideal, plan de brechas, identificación empírica de puntos de dolor y reevaluación con subagentes limpios. Previene estándares paralelos, duplicación y rupturas en el pipeline.
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。
Structured decision making: Pro/Con matrix, weighted scoring, decision tree, scenario analysis, and Eisenhower matrix.
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。
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。
AI-first web search via Exa — semantic/neural ranking, category-scoped results, fresh content retrieval, and one-shot answer synthesis with citations. Use when the user needs current web information better ranked than general web search, or a grounded answer with sources.
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 new skills, modify and improve existing skills, and measure skill performance. Use when users want to create a skill from scratch, edit, or optimize an existing skill, run evals to test a skill, benchmark skill performance with variance analysis, or optimize a skill's description for better triggering accuracy.
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。
Weave a new node (concept, framework, theory, project, principle) into the whole vault graph rather than just creating a note. Mode A links one new node against the vault by top-K retrieval, with the LLM judging only those candidates; mode --deep finds orphaned islands and wires them in. Backup before edits, preview before writing. Triggers: "/relink", "integrate this concept".
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。