「audit」の検索結果

Validate, lint, audit, or review azure-pipelines.yml — syntax, security, best practices.

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。

Validate, lint, audit, or scan a Dockerfile for security and best practices.

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。

Validate, lint, audit, or fix bash/shell/.sh scripts via ShellCheck.

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。

Validate, lint, audit, or check Fluent Bit configs (INPUT, FILTER, OUTPUT, tag routing).

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。

Validate, lint, audit, or dry-run Kubernetes manifests (Deployment, Service, ConfigMap, CRD).

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 polishing, diagnosing, tailoring, or exporting resumes for LLM, RAG, Agent, Agentic RL, post-training, pretraining, AIGC, search/ranking, multimodal, AI backend, or LLM algorithm internships from raw resume text, a materials folder, and/or a target job description. Audits evidence, maps JD fit, enforces truth boundaries, writes polished and targeted resumes, generates interviewer-style grilling questions, answer cards, evidence-upgrade plans, and optional open-source project recommendations without fabricating experience.

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。

Score a website's AI answer-engine visibility 0–100 against the open AIV rubric, and, with the user's own API keys, check and track through the OpenAI, Perplexity, Gemini and Anthropic APIs whether AI engines actually cite it. Use when the user wants to know whether AI engines can find, parse, trust and cite their site, or whether they do. Triggers on: 'does ChatGPT cite us', 'AI citation rate', 'share of voice in AI answers', 'track AI visibility weekly', 'AIV', 'AI visibility', 'GEO audit', 'generative engine optimization', 'AEO', 'llms.txt', 'will AI cite my site', 'AI search ranking', 'get cited by ChatGPT'.

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。

This skill should be used when the user asks to "revise a chapter", "continuity check", "find inconsistencies", "audit character state", "check timeline consistency", "developmental edit", "structural revision", "reverse outline", "cut a subplot", "revision passes", "what pass next", "pacing check" as a revision pass, "clue check", "cut to a word count", or "length pass", or to prepare existing story material for the next revision pass. NOT for planning book structure (use plot-structure), scene-level craft (use scene-craft), voice consistency (use voice-style), or reconciling a chapter drafted by discovery (use discovery-drafting).

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。

This skill should be used when the user asks about "theme", "controlling idea", "thematic argument", "moral argument", "thematic arc", "flat arc", "negative arc", "the lie", "antagonist design", "motif", "symbolism", "theme audit", or wants to plan, track, or revise the thematic layer of a story, including the lie, truth, ghost-wound, and arc-type fields of a character file. NOT for finding or testing a story premise (use premise-workshop), or a character's profile, relationships, or "character arc" record (use character-management).

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。

Structure a dev-tool homepage that converts developers into champions. Use when the landing page is written for the buyer instead of the developer, reads as salesy, buries what the product does, or makes it hard to start. Pairs with the ShipReady homepage audit.

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。

Evaluate Agent Skill design quality with an opinionated, practice-derived rubric informed by public specifications and examples. Use when reviewing, auditing, comparing, or improving SKILL.md files and skill packages. Produces evidence-backed findings, optional multi-dimensional scoring, and prioritized changes; treat the result as diagnostic guidance, not official certification or a universal standard.

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。

Evidence-based investigation of issues, bugs, API calls, integrations, and other aspects of software development that need a deep dive to find the root cause and solutions. Use when you need to debug, troubleshoot, diagnose, or figure out why something is broken. Does not review code for quality or style — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting review feedback to GitHub. Does not assess architectural health or structural risk — use architectural-analysis for architectural concerns. Does not research open-ended options, prior art, or how something works when nothing is broken — use research for that. Does not plan the structural change a root cause calls for — use plan-a-change. Does not map bounded contexts or domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis. Does not capture feedback on Han's own skills — use han-feedback for that.

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。

Produces a human-readable, progressive-disclosure overview of unfamiliar code or a pull request's changes — why it exists (the real problem it solves or goal it serves for the business or a user), and from there what it does, how it flows, and where to start — so you can get up to speed before working on or reviewing it. Use when you want to understand, get oriented in, make sense of, explain, or get up to speed on a chunk of code, a file, a directory, a symbol, or a PR's changes. Writes the overview to a scratch file and changes no code. Does not review code quality or raise findings — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting them. Does not produce durable feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not assess architecture or structural risk — use architectural-analysis. Does not diagnose bugs or root-cause failures — use investigate. Does not pace a person through the code one step at a time in conversation — use code-walkthrough.

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。

Performs a gap analysis between two artifacts (a current state and a desired state) and produces a plain-language, stakeholder-readable report indexed by stable gap IDs. Use when the user wants to compare, evaluate, audit, or reconcile one artifact against another. Does not investigate runtime bugs — use investigate. Does not assess module-level architecture — use architectural-analysis. Does not research open-ended options with no second artifact to compare against — use research.

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 code through a disciplined, BDD-framed Test-Driven Development loop: build a behavior test list, then drive each behavior through red-green-refactor with an enforced observed-failure gate. Use when the user wants to implement, build, or write code test-first, "do TDD", follow "red-green-refactor", drive code from tests, choose the next test by the Transformation Priority Premise (TPP) or ZOMBIES ordering, or grow a feature behavior-by-behavior with tests leading. This skill writes and changes code; it does not produce a test plan document (use automated-test-planning, or manual-test-planning for a plan a person runs by hand), review or audit existing code (use code-review), restructure existing code outside a TDD loop (use refactor, or plan-a-change to plan a multi-module restructure), specify what a feature should do (use plan-a-feature), or find the root cause of a bug (use investigate). Runs its loop to completion without pausing for review; to review each behavior as it lands, use pairing.

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。

Applies Han's shared Human-Readable Output Standard to a target you already have — a file on disk, text pasted into the prompt, or a draft already produced in the conversation — by dispatching the readability-editor to rewrite its prose so the main point comes first, headings are descriptive, each paragraph carries one idea, and sentences stay short and active, while preserving every fact. Use when you want to make a document or draft readable, edit or polish prose for readability, clean up writing, tighten wording, or re-apply the readability standard to something already written. Rewrites prose only, leaving code, diagrams, and citation identifiers unchanged. Does not write new feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not restructure code or review it — use refactor to restructure code and code-review to audit it. Does not judge the underlying work or raise findings; it only rewrites the writing.

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 a comprehensive code review on local source files. Use this skill when the user asks to review, audit, inspect, evaluate, or check code, even if they never use the word "review." Does not post comments to GitHub pull requests — use post-code-review-to-pr for that. Does not analyze architectural structure or module boundaries — use architectural-analysis for that. Does not explain code or a PR to build understanding before reviewing — use code-overview for a written overview, or code-walkthrough to be paced through it one step at a time. Does not map bounded contexts or domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis for that. Does not capture feedback on Han's own skills — use han-feedback for that.

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。

Guides implementation of technical, contractual, and organisational supplementary measures for international data transfers per EDPB Recommendations 01/2020. Covers encryption, pseudonymisation, split processing, audit rights, transparency obligations, and internal policies. Keywords: supplementary measures, encryption, pseudonymisation, EDPB recommendations, transfer safeguards.

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。

Manages retention exception workflows including request-approval processes, duration limits, periodic review cycles, documentation requirements, and audit trail maintenance. Covers legitimate grounds for extending retention beyond scheduled periods and governance controls to prevent indefinite data hoarding. Activate for retention exception, retention extension, data hoarding prevention, retention override queries.

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 and implement Purpose-Based Access Control (PBAC) architecture including purpose ontology definition, policy engine configuration, audit logging of purpose verification at query time, and integration with existing IAM systems. Enforces GDPR Article 5(1)(b) purpose limitation technically.

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 privacy API patterns including data subject API for DSAR endpoints, consent API for preference management, deletion API with cascading delete orchestration, and audit API for compliance reporting. Provides OpenAPI specifications, error handling, rate limiting, and authentication patterns.

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。

Configures privacy settings for enterprise HR systems including SAP SuccessFactors, Workday, and BambooHR. Covers role-based access controls, automated data retention enforcement, cross-border transfer configurations, audit logging, data subject rights facilitation, and field-level security. Keywords: HR system, SAP SuccessFactors, Workday, BambooHR, RBAC, retention automation, cross-border transfer, privacy configuration.

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。

Guides GDPR certification mechanism implementation per Articles 42-43 including accredited certification body selection, certification criteria per EDPB guidelines, certification scope, periodic audit requirements, seal and mark usage rules, and relationship to codes of conduct. Covers EDPB/ENISA certification framework and national accreditation. Keywords: GDPR certification, Article 42, Article 43, certification body, EDPB, seal, mark, accreditation.

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。

Guides preparation for supervisory authority (DPA) inspections and investigations including document readiness checklists, interview preparation for key personnel, technical demonstration procedures, on-site logistics, response protocols, and post-inspection follow-up. Covers unannounced inspections, formal audits, and complaint-triggered investigations. Keywords: DPA inspection, supervisory authority, investigation, readiness, interview preparation, response protocol.

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。