「eth」の検索結果

Drafts one anonymised DRAFT case study (situation, approach, outcome as evidenced, optional lessons) from engagement notes, status reports, closing reports, emails and metrics extracts the user supplies, with a fact trace to the notes, an evidence grade on every result, quotes only where the user supplied them with speaker role and permission, an anonymisation log and a confidentiality checklist that must be completed before publication. Use when the user asks to "write a case study from these notes", "turn this engagement into a customer story", "draft a success story for the website", "anonymise this project write-up" or "prepare a reference case for the proposal". Do not use for redacting identifiers from an existing document, use document-deidentification-pass instead; for checking whether a document's claims are substantiated, use claims-evidence-map. 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。

Builds a DRAFT structured interview scorecard from a job description: five to eight competencies traced to it, past-behaviour and situational evidence questions with probes, four-level rating anchors written as observable behaviours, a blank scoring sheet, a panel plan and the items the hiring manager must confirm. Use when the user asks to "build an interview scorecard for this job description", "write competency questions for this role", "draft the interview guide for the panel", "set up a rating scale for the interviewers", "put together a structured interview kit" or "create a hiring rubric from the JD". Do not use for writing or fixing the job description itself, use job-description-drafter instead; for the new hire's first 90 days, use onboarding-plan-builder. 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。

Prepares a DRAFT leadership-meeting briefing pack from the reports, meeting notes, emails and dashboard exports the user provides: one headline, metrics exactly as stated with period and source, decisions the meeting must take, risks as reported, talking points with anticipated questions, a source reference on every line and UNKNOWN where the material is silent. Use when the user asks to "brief the leadership team", "prepare the exec pack", "pull together a briefing for the steering committee", "summarise these reports for the CEO", "what do I tell the board on Monday" or "build the pre-read for the management meeting". Do not use for a formal board or committee paper seeking a resolution, use board-paper-skeleton instead; for a personal one-page prep drawn from the user's own calendar and inbox, use meeting-prep-onepager. 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 a proposal, business case, deck or rollout plan in character as a Works Council Representative archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, employee-impact risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "review this as the works council would", "what would the works council say about this rollout", "prepare me for the staff council consultation", "find the employee-impact gaps in this plan" or "pressure-test this deck from the employee representative side". Do not use for people strategy, restructuring or HR policy, use chro-reviewer instead; for whether frontline staff will adopt or work around the change, use frontline-skeptic-reviewer. 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。

Reads one spreadsheet, CSV export or pasted table together with the user's question and drafts an insight pack: a data profile, observations cited to named columns and values and framed as leads, caveats, and suggested charts and follow-up analyses. Every figure carries the label "as read, verify in source"; correlation is never stated as causation. Use when the user asks to "profile this spreadsheet", "what does this data say", "find anomalies in this extract", "give me a first read on this CSV" or "summarise this table". Do not use for a purchase order log or spend extract, use purchase-order-anomaly-review instead; for actuals versus budget, use budget-variance-explainer instead; for a report that arrives by email on a schedule, use report-attachment-analyzer 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。

Pre-checks one expense claim or travel plan, line by line, against the expense or travel policy the user supplies, and returns a DRAFT precheck sheet: the policy clause matched to each line, the limit quoted as the policy states it, whether the amount sits within, at or outside that limit, missing receipts, pre-approvals or justifications, and neutral questions for the approver and the claimant, with UNKNOWN wherever the policy or the claim is silent. Use when the user asks to "check this expense claim against policy", "pre-check my travel request", "is this claim within policy", "review these expenses before I submit them", "what receipts or approvals are missing" or "prepare the approver's questions for this claim". Do not use for a purchase order log or spend extract, use purchase-order-anomaly-review instead; do not use to compare a policy against a standard or regulation, use policy-gap-review 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 a proposal, business case, deck or vendor contract in character as a Head of Procurement archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage or clause, commercial risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "review this from a procurement angle", "what would procurement say about this proposal", "pressure-test this vendor contract commercially", "find the holes before the sourcing committee" or "check the renewal terms like a Head of Procurement would". Do not use for liability, IP, regulatory or signing-authority questions, use general-counsel-reviewer instead; for whether the spend fits the budget, use cfo-reviewer; for vendor security, use ciso-reviewer. 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。

The SuperCollider language itself - function blocks and argument syntax, UGen rate methods (.ar/.kr/.ir), multi-channel expansion, var scoping, ~environment variables, the class library's shape, and the error messages that mean a specific mistake. Written for an agent that knows audio DSP but not this language.

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。

Guide for creating high-quality MCP (Model Context Protocol) servers that enable LLMs to interact with external services through well-designed tools. Use when building MCP servers to integrate external APIs or services, whether in Python (FastMCP) or Node/TypeScript (MCP SDK).

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 implementing features or fixing bugs with strict Test-Driven Development (TDD). Activate for coding tasks that require new functionality, refactoring, or comprehensive test coverage, especially when the user mentions TDD or Test Driven 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。

Create, update, fix, or refine documentation using Diataxis framework and BMad Method style guide. Use when user asks to 'create a doc', 'update docs', 'fix docs style', 'refine docs', or 'improve docs 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。

Bring past diagnoses to a bug before fixing it, record the new root-cause hypothesis, and close it as confirmed or refuted once the fix is verified. Use when a bug could come from more than one layer, or looks like something seen before.

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。

- End-to-end workflow to establish where and when a photo or video was captured and whether it is authentic — evidentiary handling, metadata extraction, reverse image search for provenance, visual geolocation, chronolocation from shadows, and manipulation… Use when asked to verify where an image was taken, confirm or refute a claimed location or date, or authenticate media before relying on 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。

- Entry point for open-source intelligence, investigation and verification work. Use when asked to investigate, research, verify, vet, check out, look up, background-check, trace, attribute or find someone or something; when a request involves due diligence, KYC or KYB, counterparty or vendor risk, sanctions and PEP screening, AML, fraud, business email compromise

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。

- Corporate due-diligence workflow — resolve a brand or website to its registered legal entity, map group structure and beneficial ownership, profile officers and directors, enumerate the digital estate, and screen litigation, insolvency,… Use when asked to check out, vet or research a company, verify a supplier or counterparty before signing or paying, or assess whether a business is real

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 pull request by measuring which of its own guards its own test suite actually catches, via a small mutation matrix. Use when reviewing a PR, checking whether a regression test is real, or asked 'is this change actually tested?', 'does this test do anything', 'mutation test this'.

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。

Show what maintenance robots already did today before you repair anything by hand: backups, reindexes, guards, quotas and what went stale. Use when deciding whether to rerun a backup, or when a command was blocked by a once-a-day gate. Triggers: /hk, /housekeeping, what was done today, should I run the backup, why was this blocked, show quotas, housekeeping status.

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。

- Reverse image search across Yandex, Google Lens, Bing Visual Search, TinEye and Baidu to find where a picture came from and who published… Use when reverse image searching, identifying a photo, face, logo, product, uniform or building, tracing a profile picture or avatar, finding the oldest copy of an image, checking whether a photo is stock or a repost, or reverse-searching a video by keyframes

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。

Show what the background agents across every machine are doing right now, what they have built or committed, and whether anything is stuck or burning tokens. Read-only diagnostic. Triggers: "/fleet", "what are my agents doing", "is anything stuck".

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。

Verify SIPS proof surfaces before reporting completion. Use when asked to scan, verify, validate, prove, audit, or check whether a repo or SIPS install is coherent.

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。

Decide whether to reuse, improve, or scaffold a deterministic helper. Use when repeated work is slow, brittle, or blocked by a missing local tool.

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。

Inspect SIPS Homebase status, manifest wiring, routes, host visibility, and MCP freshness. Use when asked for SIPS status, command center, host audit, plugin visibility, or whether Homebase is fresh.

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。

Research any open-source repository end to end and answer the core question — SHOULD YOU contribute to it? — with a GO / NO-GO / GO-IF verdict backed by evidence: snapshot, momentum, contribution landscape (PR acceptance rates, outside-contributor merge rates, first-timer outcomes), issue health, governance, community sentiment, and a final go/no-go recommendation. Use when the user asks 'should I contribute to X', wants a before-I-contribute due-diligence check on a project, asks whether a project accepts outside PRs, wants contribution-health numbers like PR merge rates or stale-PR counts, or asks for a deep dive on an open-source codebase's health and dynamics before investing time in 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。

Use when deciding whether to implement UI from native HTML/CSS, accessible primitives, shadcn-style source components, or visual component registries such as 21st.dev, Aceternity, React Bits, Motion Primitives, Magic UI, or Animate UI.

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。