「auth」の検索結果

Compile deep repository evidence into artifact-bound correctness doctrine — authority/law/proof maps, owned invariants, failure archaeology, and the strongest durable destination for each piece of knowledge, plus an optional minimal repository-specific skill portfolio. Use when the user wants both deep codebase understanding AND durable doctrine, knowledge routing, or repo-specific skill recommendations. Research discoverable facts before asking. Read-only. Not for quick onboarding, one isolated invariant, ordinary implementation, generic review, or direct skill creation.

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 a free remote development host on Oracle Cloud (Always Free) end to end — install and authenticate the OCI CLI, provision VCN/subnet/NSG/instance with capacity retries, then apply a hardened Ubuntu 22.04 Ansible stack (Tailscale-only SSH, ufw, fail2ban, mosh, persistent tmux, Caddy tailnet web previews, on-host verification suite) and tear it down again. Use when the user says "free remote dev environment", "Oracle Cloud free tier dev box", "OCI Always Free VPS", "give me a cloud dev machine for free", "provision a dev host on Oracle", or asks to move a Tailscale-only dev host setup to Oracle Cloud. Covers OCI CLI bootstrap, the Tailscale cutover, verification, costs, and teardown.

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 bugs and features that depend on local hosts, localhost, filesystem home state, auth, polling, installed apps, real conversations, or signed native helpers.

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 and interpret Clawix UI geometry, screenshot, protected-surface, and debt-baseline checks without authorizing visual repair.

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 configuring GitBook documentation sites, authoring GitBook-flavored markdown pages and custom blocks, integrating OpenAPI/Swagger specs, driving GitBook Change Request workflows (create, review, comment, resolve), or building GitBook platform integrations. Do not use for general repository code reviews, general .NET OpenAPI schema generation, or non-GitBook markdown.

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 executing or resuming an approved plan from `dev/active/<task>/` or `.worktrees/<task>`, including phase commits, verification, PR creation, and handoff; not for plan authorship or 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。

Load for Blazor BFF server work involving YARP proxy routes, cookie sessions, access-token forwarding/refresh, downstream API calls, BFF handlers, or browser-to-API auth failures; not for client component rendering or API JWT validation alone.

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 building .NET ATProtocol applications with CarpaNet source generators, XRPC queries, Jetstream subscriptions, OAuth 2.0 DPoP, or Lexicon JSON 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。

Load when authoring/reviewing commit messages or PR titles/descriptions, or replacing a materially diverged phase commit contract; not for ordinary implementation or executing an unchanged approved contract.

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 working on Tier 0 Sovereign (payments, money, orders), Tier 1 Security (auth, tenancy, migrations), or Tier 2 Privacy (PII, erasure) tasks to enforce advanced model tier, Invariant-Breaker adversarial tests, and zero-PII telemetry validation.

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 creating, updating, auditing, simplifying, routing, or validating `.agents/skills/*`, `SKILL.md` descriptions/resources, the skill schema, or skill-related agent context tests; not for ordinary application code or generic documentation.

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。

Guidance for using asc cli in this repo (flags, output formats, pagination, auth, and discovery). Use when asked to run or design asc commands or interact with App Store Connect via the CLI.

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。

Guidance for using asc cli in this repo (flags, output formats, pagination, auth, and discovery). Use when asked to run or design asc commands or interact with App Store Connect via the CLI.

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 someone else's PR through an architectural/strategic lens — does it shift design, raise complexity, or quietly change precedent? Drives a brief reflective discussion with the user, then posts a concise review comment via `gh`. Defers line-level and bug-hunting concerns to AI review bots and the PR author.

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。

Author a completed-spec fixture — a seeded intent graph plus a believable four-phase interview transcript — for a brunch feature, so it can feed any downstream tooling that consumes a completed spec or dogfood the UI. Use when you need a real completed specification in .brunch/brunch.db for testing or demo: pick a feature from memory/SPEC.md (or a free description), choose a stress profile (coverage|clean), and produce a registered scenario seed + an interview-questions doc that match exactly.

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。

Guidance on writing high-quality requirements: the requirement quality characteristics and the EARS (Easy Approach to Requirements Syntax) patterns — ubiquitous, event-driven, state-driven, optional-feature, unwanted-behaviour — for unambiguous, singular, verifiable requirements, plus defect/anti-pattern review and verification & traceability. Use when authoring or reviewing requirements. Original synthesis citing EARS (Mavin et al.) and NASA public-domain guidance; not a reproduction of ISO/IEC/IEEE 29148 or the EARS paper.

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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) 2.0. Use for cybersecurity risk management, GOVERN, IDENTIFY, PROTECT, DETECT, RESPOND, RECOVER, Organizational Profiles, CSF Tiers, supply chain risk, enterprise risk management, incident response. Covers the CSF 2.0 document only; does not cover specific SP 800-53 controls, NIST RMF system authorization steps, or sector-specific regulations.

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 NPR 7150.2D — NASA Software Engineering Requirements. Use for NASA's Agency-wide software-engineering requirements: the software classification scheme (Classes A–F), the Requirements Mapping Matrix and class-driven applicability, tailoring and Technical Authority governance, the SWE-### 'shall' requirements across software management (Ch 3) and the engineering life cycle (Ch 4), the supporting disciplines (configuration management, risk, peer reviews/inspections, measurement, non-conformance — Ch 5), safety-critical and cybersecurity requirements, IV&V applicability, traceability, and the Appendix A definitions. Does not cover detailed software-assurance/safety procedures (see NASA-STD-8739.8), implementation how-to and document content (see NASA-HDBK-2203), the systems-engineering process framework (see NPR 7123.1), or program/project management (see NPR 7120.5).

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 base from the GAO Schedule Assessment Guide (GAO-16-89G, 2015). Use for building, assessing, or auditing a program's integrated master schedule (IMS): the ten best practices of a reliable schedule (capture, sequence, resource, duration, traceability, valid critical path, reasonable total float, schedule risk analysis, updating, baseline), the four characteristics (comprehensive, well-constructed, credible, controlled), critical path method arithmetic (forward/backward pass, total float), schedule risk analysis (Monte Carlo, contingency), statusing and baseline control, and the Appendix II audit triad. Scheduling/time-management oriented: it is the authority on schedule reliability, but it is NOT a cost-estimating guide, a full SE process model, an agile guide, or a risk-management framework — see sibling packs (gao-cost, dau-se-guidebook, nasa-schedule, nasa-risk) 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 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。

Bindet das model-agnostische Computer-Use-Modul open-compute (Screenshot-Wahrnehmung, Windows-UIA-Elementklicks, sicherheitsgegatete Aktionen) fuer ALLE Agenten des Systems ein -- Claude Code, Codex und agy/Antigravity. Nutzen, wenn ein Dienst eine interaktive GUI- oder Browser-Aktion braucht, die kein reiner Text-/API-Weg loesen kann (Paradebeispiel: Tailscale-Reauth im Browser, sonstige Login-/Consent-Dialoge, Dialogfenster-Klicks). Standard ab 2026-08-02: open-compute statt Aufgeben oder Abwarten nutzen.

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。

Erstellt oder überarbeitet einen Skill FÜR DIESES ÖKOSYSTEM: delegiert die generische Interview-/Entwurfs-/Eval-Schleife an das offizielle skill-creator-Plugin (Anthropic, Apache-2.0), setzt aber zusätzlich die ellmos-Anforderungen durch, die das offizielle Plugin nicht kennt — Haus-Frontmatter (9 Felder), Kategorie/Sichtbarkeits-Regeln, anbieter-/nutzer-/ellmos-neutrale aber ellmos-sensitive Erkennung via grounding-seed, mitgelieferte config.json (inkl. Lernvertrag) + connections.json, Anbieter-/Vendor-Bewusstsein (State-of-the-Art-Alternativen inkl. eigener ellmos-Komponenten vorschlagen), einen Selbstaktualisierungs-Abschnitt UND einen wiederverwendbaren Lern-/Abdeckungs-Dateisatz (user-usecases.json, usecase-gaps.json, known-providers-and-abilities.json, gap-closing-analysis.json — an skill-creators evals.json und A2A/AgentSkill angelehnt, kein Parallelstandard). IMMER nutzen, wenn ein NEUER Skill für dieses System entstehen oder ein bestehender auf ellmos-Konformität nachgerüstet werden soll — auch bei "erstelle einen Skill", "bau mir einen Skill für X", "skill-creator nutzen", "neuen Skill anlegen", "diesen Skill ellmos-konform machen", "Lernvertrag/Verhaltenscodex für einen Skill anlegen", "Usecase-Abdeckung eines Skills prüfen". Für reines Skill-FINDEN/ROUTEN stattdessen skill-finder, für Landschafts-Audit skill-explorer.

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。

Erstellt und verwendet einen anbieterneutralen semantischen Routing-Graphen aus Personas, koordinierenden Rollen, Experten und aktiven Skill-Endpunkten. Verwenden, wenn ein LLM eine Anfrage von einer Leitrolle über einen Experten zu einem Skill routen, aus einem vorhandenen Agentensystem einen portablen Persona-Router extrahieren, eine semantische Domänenkarte mit einer lexikalischen Skill-Registry kombinieren oder fehlende Verbindungen zwischen Rolle und Skill sichtbar machen soll, statt still auf einen Ersatz zurückzufallen. Auslöser sind unter anderem semantisches Persona-Routing, Persona-Umbrella, Rollen-Router, Boss-Agent-Experten-Skill-Routing, Agentenrollen-Export oder die Wiederverwendung von Personas über mehrere LLM-Anbieter hinweg.

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。