「risk」の検索結果

Quantify cyber risk using FAIR methodology with Monte Carlo simulation, assess control effectiveness against NIST CSF/CIS/ISO 27001 frameworks, evaluate risk appetite alignment, and analyze cyber insurance coverage adequacy. Covers threat landscape mapping, asset valuation, loss event frequency and magnitude estimation, annualized loss expectancy calculation, control gap analysis with ROI ranking, residual risk assessment, and insurance policy gap modeling at 90th/95th/99th percentile loss scenarios. Use when building risk registers, preparing board-level risk dashboards, evaluating security investment priorities, assessing cyber insurance coverage, or auditing any organization's risk quantification maturity per NIST RMF, ISO 27005, or FAIR standards.

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 customer health signals, identify churn risk flags, and generate an intervention playbook. Use when user says "churn risk", "customer at risk", "red account", "at-risk customer", "health score dropped", "renewal at risk", "customer going dark", "cancel risk", or "what's wrong with this account" - even if they don't say "churn" explicitly. Applies to CSMs triaging accounts or building proactive retention workflows.

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 practitioner needs to classify the risk level of an upcoming Salesforce deployment, define rollback trigger conditions, or assign decision authority before the release window opens. Triggers: 'how risky is this release', 'what needs rollback planning', 'classify deployment risk', 'pre-deployment risk checklist', 'rollback decision authority', 'high risk metadata types'. NOT for executing the deployment itself, writing CI/CD pipeline code, or troubleshooting failures after a deployment has already run — use admin/change-management-and-deployment for execution planning and devops/deployment-error-troubleshooting for post-failure diagnosis.

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。

Identify, assess, and mitigate operational risks. Trigger with "what are the risks", "risk assessment", "risk register", "what could go wrong", or when the user is evaluating risks associated with a project, vendor, process, or decision.

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 NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) advisor covering all four functions: GOVERN, MAP, MEASURE, MANAGE. Use this skill whenever a user asks about NIST AI RMF, AI risk management, AI trustworthiness, GOVERN function, MAP function, MEASURE function, MANAGE function, AI RMF Playbook, AI risk profiles, responsible AI, AI bias management, AI transparency, AI explainability, AI reliability, AI safety, NIST AI 100-1, AI risk assessment, AI incident response, or alignment to EU AI Act, ISO 42001, or NIST CSF via AI RMF. Trigger even if the user doesn't say "skill" — any NIST AI RMF or AI governance risk question should use this skill.

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。

Vendor privacy risk tiering methodology for processor management. Covers scoring factors including data volume, sensitivity, transfer locations, certifications, breach history, and control maturity with weighted risk calculation and tier assignment.

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。

Provides combined DPIA and AI Act conformity assessment template with integrated risk scoring matrix. Covers GDPR Art. 35 DPIA elements, AI Act high-risk system requirements, mitigation measures, and human oversight assessment. Keywords: DPIA template, conformity assessment, risk scoring, AI Act, combined assessment, high-risk AI.

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。

Identify, assess, and mitigate operational risks. Trigger with "what are the risks", "risk assessment", "risk register", "what could go wrong", or when the user is evaluating risks associated with a project, vendor, process, or decision.

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。

Surface risks through guided questioning, helping users consider pivots, constraints, and prioritization during PRD v0.5 Red Team Review. Triggers on requests to identify risks, stress-test the idea, perform red team review, or when user asks "what could go wrong?", "identify risks", "red team", "risk assessment", "challenge assumptions", "stress test the idea". Consumes all prior IDs (CFD-, BR-, FEA-, PER-, UJ-, SCR-) as interview context. Outputs RISK- entries with owner decisions and mitigations. Feeds v0.5 Technical Stack Selection.

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。

Produce a risk matrix or heatmap that quantifies what could break by business impact × probability, runs failure mode analysis on the top items, and maps test coverage to risk zones. Includes stakeholder interview frameworks and continuous reassessment. Run this BEFORE test-strategy or test-planning. Use when: "risk assessment," "risk matrix," "risk heatmap," "what could break," "critical paths," "failure modes," "where to focus testing." Not for: multi-quarter QA direction — use test-strategy. Not for: a single sprint/release test plan — use test-planning. Not for: hands-on session-based bug hunting — use exploratory-testing. Related: test-strategy, test-planning, release-readiness, qa-metrics.

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。

Act as a project-management copilot (PM/PMO) for the delivery loop: charters, plans and schedules, estimates, risk registers, status reports, scope changes, stakeholder communication, meeting actions, lessons learned, and portfolio roll-ups, in a per-project `_project/` workspace. Use whenever the user wants to start, plan, track, rescue, or report on a project: "kick off this project", "make a project plan / timeline / WBS", "what date can I commit to", "build a risk register", "run a pre-mortem", "write the weekly status report", "the deadline slipped, what now", "turn this meeting into action items", "review my project portfolio", in any language ("quản lý dự án", "gestion de projet", "プロジェクト管理", "项目管理"), even when they never say "project management". Also use whenever a `_project/` directory exists and the user asks about schedule, deadline, risk, status, scope, budget, or stakeholders. Not for what to build (product-manager) or company-level bets (strategy-board).

Constructs risk parity allocation with equal risk contribution, leverage optimization, and asset class volatility targeting. Use when building risk parity, equalizing risk contribution, or designing leveraged balanced portfolios.

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。

Risk Assessment & Position Sizing — volatility profile (beta/ATR/HV), historical drawdowns, correlation analysis, liquidity risk, position sizing tables (fixed %, volatility-adjusted, Kelly Criterion), and VaR estimates. Returns Risk Score (0-100, higher = safer). Triggered by "trade risk <TICKER>".

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。

"Calculate Value at Risk to estimate maximum portfolio loss at a given confidence level. Use this skill when the user needs to quantify downside risk, set risk limits, or report regulatory risk measures — even if they say 'worst case loss', 'portfolio risk', or 'how much could we lose'.".

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。

Maintain a centralized living risk register across projects. Use this skill when: - You need to create or update a risk register for a project or feature - You want to consolidate risks from individual specs into one register - You need to review and update risk status, mitigations, and owners - You want a cross-project risk view

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。

Internal audit support skill aligned with IIA (Institute of Internal Auditors) International Standards. Provides risk-based audit planning, audit program development, workpaper documentation, finding development (Condition/Criteria/Cause/Effect), and Corrective Action Request (CAR) tracking. Use when: planning annual/quarterly audits, creating risk assessment matrices, developing audit programs and test procedures, documenting audit workpapers, writing audit findings and reports, tracking corrective actions and follow-ups, preparing for external audits (SOX, ISO). Triggers: "internal audit", "audit plan", "audit program", "audit workpaper", "audit finding", "risk assessment", "CAR tracking", "corrective action", "IIA Standards", "COSO framework", "監査計画", "監査プログラム", "監査調書", "是正措置", "リスク評価".

Knowledge base from NIST SP 800-37 Revision 2, the Risk Management Framework (RMF) for information systems and organizations. Use for the seven RMF steps (Prepare, Categorize, Select, Implement, Assess, Authorize, Monitor) and their tasks; the three-tier organization-wide risk model; authorization boundaries; the requirements-to-controls relationship; security categorization (FIPS 199/200 high-water mark) and control selection/tailoring (SP 800-53/53B baselines); assessment, the authorization decision and risk acceptance, continuous monitoring and ongoing authorization; the security/privacy distinction; and supply chain risk management. This is the security-and-privacy-risk-governance edge of systems engineering — it governs how much protection and whether to accept residual risk, complementing the disciplines that decide how protection is built. Does NOT reproduce the SP 800-53 control catalog or its baselines, the FIPS impact tables, or the ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 process text; it names and routes to them rather than restating them.

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 NASA Probabilistic Risk Assessment Procedures Guide (NASA/SP-2011-3421, 2nd ed.). Use for quantitative PRA of aerospace and safety-critical systems: the risk triplet and scenario logic stack (MLD, ESD, event trees, fault trees, minimal cut sets), Bayesian data collection and parameter estimation, aleatory/epistemic uncertainty modeling and common-cause failure (Alpha Factor, beta-factor, CCBE), human reliability analysis (THERP, CREAM, NARA, SPAR-H), context-based software risk (CSRM), physics-based and structural/phenomenological models (stress-strength, limit states, FORM/SORM, NASGRO, range safety), uncertainty propagation and importance measures (F-V, RAW, Birnbaum, DIM), and launch-abort modeling with worked PRA examples. This is the QUANTITATIVE engine beneath NASA's risk doctrine — for the qualitative RIDM/CRM decision framework use the nasa-risk pack. Thin on programme management, organisational risk governance, and non-aerospace regulatory contexts; aerospace-focused and anchored to the 2011 second edition.

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。

Reads a risk register together with meeting notes and incident reports and returns a draft update pack: existing risks whose exposure, controls, ownership or status the sources say have changed, new risk candidates, closure candidates, and the one owner decision each item needs. Never assigns or changes a likelihood, impact, score or colour and never edits the register; owners decide. Use when the user asks to "update the risk register from these minutes", "refresh the register with the incidents since the last review", "reconcile the register against the notes" or "what changed on our risks". Do not use for writing up an incident itself, use incident-postmortem-drafter or data-incident-impact-brief instead; to track actions from minutes, use corrective-action-tracker. 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。

Calculate portfolio risk metrics including VaR, CVaR, Sharpe, Sortino, and drawdown analysis. Use when measuring portfolio risk, implementing risk limits, or building risk monitoring systems.

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。

EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) operational compliance for compliance teams. Three Article-level decisions: (1) What's the risk tier of this AI system — prohibited (Art. 5), high-risk (Art. 6 + Annex III), limited-risk (Art. 50), or minimal-risk? (2) For high-risk systems, what's the Article 43 conformity assessment route (Module A internal control vs Module H full QMS + notified body) and what goes in the Annex IV technical documentation? (3) Per organizational role (provider / deployer / importer / distributor / authorized representative), what are the active obligations and deadlines? Use during AI system intake review, when planning conformity assessment, or when scoping deployer obligations. Cites Articles + Annexes for every output. NOT executive AI strategy (see chief-ai-officer-advisor). NOT a legal substitute.

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。

Calculate portfolio risk metrics including VaR, CVaR, Sharpe, Sortino, and drawdown analysis. Use when measuring portfolio risk, implementing risk limits, or building risk monitoring systems.

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。

Assess physical and transition climate risk for a site, product, or portfolio with scenario-based structure. Use when asked to run a climate risk assessment, evaluate physical or transition risk, prepare TCFD/ESRS-style climate risk analysis, or assess how climate scenarios affect an asset or business. Produces a hazard-exposure-vulnerability matrix across 2030/2040/2050 horizons and labelled scenarios, with financial-impact ranges, confidence levels, and adaptation options.

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 DORA (Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 — Digital Operational Resilience Act) compliance advisor for EU financial entities. Use this skill whenever a user asks about DORA compliance, ICT risk management frameworks, ICT incident classification or reporting, threat-led penetration testing (TLPT), ICT third-party risk management, Register of Information, contractual provisions with ICT providers, ICT concentration risk, oversight of critical ICT third-party service providers (CTPPs), or any DORA RTS/ITS obligation. Also trigger for: "DORA gap analysis", "DORA readiness", "Art. 6 ICT risk framework", "Art. 17 incident reporting", "Art. 26 TLPT", "Art. 28 third-party policy", "Art. 30 contractual provisions", "Register of Information CIR 2024/2956", "critical TPSP designation", "DORA vs NIS2", "DORA simplified framework", or EBA/ESMA/EIOPA digital resilience guidance.

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。