「triage」の検索結果

Profile, diagnose, and remediate SwiftUI runtime performance using code review, Instruments, and repeatable measurements. Use when a SwiftUI screen renders slowly, scrolling or animations hitch, view bodies update excessively, list identity churns, layout work spikes, or broad Observation dependencies raise CPU cost. Covers evidence-based triage, SwiftUI Instruments lanes, lazy-container guardrails, state lifetime, and before/after verification.

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 collecting or analyzing production iOS or iPadOS performance telemetry with MetricKit, including iOS 27 MetricManager async metric or diagnostic reports, hang or crash triage, custom signposts, extended launch measurement, durable export, or iOS 26 MXMetricManager compatibility.

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。

Reusable git delivery workflows derived from local slash commands (commit, push, PR, release notes, GitHub Actions failure triage with worktree-based fixes, and isolating your own changes from a shared dirty workspace).

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。

Triage, repair, and close MCP attribution issues from the local report API with evidence-driven decisions and isolated Worktrunk worktrees. Use this skill when Codex needs to process `tool` attribution issues and skills-related attribution issues, inspect related runs, decide whether the issue is actionable in `mcp/src` or `config/source/skills`, update attribution fields as `owner=codex`, and then complete the fix loop through GitHub issue tracking, worktree-based code changes, PR submission, and follow-up iteration when the problem is repairable.

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。

Periodically analyze open pull requests for CI failures, code review feedback, and quality issues, then fix them in batch. Use this skill when the user asks to check PR status, triage CI failures, fix review comments, analyze open PRs, or run a scheduled PR health check across the repository.

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 on a mailbox export to sort mail into needs reply, updates, promotional, sales and spam — which messages are addressed to the person at all. For a support queue use jev triage.

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。

Capture or triage small Neva repository and engineering-harness frictions without derailing feature work.

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。

Import a large archive into the vault in controlled batches: triage what is worth ingesting, process oldest first, checkpoint after every batch, and keep cost visible. Use this skill whenever the user wants to import years of bookmarks, an export from another notes app, a downloads folder, a chat history dump, or says "backfill", "bulk import", "process my archive". Do NOT use for ingesting one or a few new sources, which is second-brain-ingest.

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。

Triage an exported chat history into what to ingest, what to archive and what to delete, with a privacy pass first. Use this skill when the user has exported their Claude or ChatGPT history, asks to import old conversations, or asks what in their chat archive is worth keeping. Do NOT use for ingesting a single pasted conversation, or for any material the user has not explicitly asked to bring into the vault.

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。

Find the decisions in a pipeline that do not need the expensive model and propose the gate for each: a rule, a classic classifier, or a small model, with fail-closed routing. Use when the user asks to cut model costs or latency, says the big model handles everything, or wants a triage / routing / filter layer in front of an agent. Analysis plus an optional baseline scaffold. Do NOT use for auditing context layout (context-audit) or for building eval suites (evals-bootstrap).

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。

Post project updates to team chat, gather feedback, triage responses, and plan next steps. Adapts to available tools (chat, git, issues, tasks). First run discovers tools and saves a playbook; subsequent runs execute from the playbook. Trigger with 'team update', 'post update', 'sync with team', 'standup', 'check team chat', 'feedback loop', 'project update', 'what did the team say'.

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。

Perform a structured maintainer-style PR review for the mariadb-operator repository. Gathers PR context, triages the change, and evaluates correctness, safety, pitfalls, backwards compatibility and code quality against the project conventions documented in AGENTS.md. Use whenever the user mentions a mariadb-operator PR number or URL and wants any kind of judgment on it — "review this PR", "what do you think of #1234", "is this safe to merge", "assess this diff", "take a look at this change" — even if they don't literally say "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。

Switch between existing customer engagements and triage competing needs. Use when context switching causes confusion; requires engagement records and preserves one client per write.

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。

Triage an outage, loss of stakeholder trust or a failing engagement direction. Use for urgent recovery; distinguish diagnosis from authorized production mitigation.

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。

Manage active production incidents through detection, triage, mitigation, communication, and resolution with structured roles and decision-making. Use this skill whenever the user has an active incident, a production issue, a service outage, a security incident, or needs to plan incident response procedures. Triggers on incident response, production incident, outage, service down, site down, P0, P1, severity, downtime, on-call, incident commander, status page, postmortem prep. Also triggers when something is actively broken in production and the user is figuring out what to do.

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。

Productboard expert for workspace setup, Insight-to-Feature triage, Driver scoring, Releases, Roadmap views, and REST API automation. Use for Productboard administration, prioritization workflows, and programmatic API operations.

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。

Classify a batch of emails into action categories (reply now, reply later, archive, delete, unsubscribe) and surface unsubscribe candidates. Use after a busy week, running inbox zero, or triaging email overload.

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。

Audit all campaigns running for a brand across channels, with 4-tier triage. "we just inherited this account"

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。

Screen incoming NDAs and classify them as GREEN (standard), YELLOW (needs review), or RED (significant issues). Use when a new NDA comes in from sales or business development, when assessing NDA risk level, or when deciding whether an NDA needs full counsel 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。

Framework for demonstrating AI capabilities in legal contexts. Provides detailed personas across tenant law, business contracts, startup disputes, employment claims, and consumer protection with progressive complexity scenarios. Use when: (1) Demonstrating AI-powered legal triage or intake systems, (2) Showcasing responsible AI-assisted client interactions, (3) Training staff on appropriate AI use in legal contexts, (4) Creating realistic scenarios for legal tech presentations, (5) Developing educational materials about AI in legal services, or (6) Testing AI-powered legal information systems in controlled environments.

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。

Assesses which of the Art. 50(1)-(5) transparency obligations of the EU AI Act apply to a given AI system's provider or deployer, grounded in the final Code of Practice on Transparency of AI-Generated Content (June 2026) and the Commission's draft Art. 50 Guidelines. Covers AI-chatbot disclosure, deepfake and synthetic-content marking/watermarking, emotion-recognition and biometric-categorisation notices, the machine-readable marking duty, the obviousness exceptions, and the implementation timeline. Outputs a formal mini-report plus a per-obligation compliance checklist with gap flags. For breadth-first tier triage use the EU AI Act System Classifier; for raw Art. 50 text and Q&A use the EU AI Act Knowledge Base; for the full role x tier matrix use the EU AI Act Obligations Mapper.

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。

An end-to-end method for drafting and finalising a complex, multi-pillar regulated fintech agreement — from intake to signature. Authored from a senior fintech lawyer's manual: a licensed payment-services provider engaging a counterparty across agent cash-in/cash-out, QR payments, wallet e-payments, and a marketplace, each with its own regulatory profile. Runs five phases and fourteen steps: regulatory mapping (activity-to-licence matrix, grey-zone classification gates), architecture (framework-plus-sub-agreement structure, ring-fenced marketplace), the regulatory–commercial balance (what flexes vs what cannot), core drafting (authority, float mechanics, hard-coded regulator caps, liability — all tracking control), execution-blocker triage, and a pre-signature check closing open blockers as conditions precedent. It refuses to invent licence-specific values or draft a representation as true without executed evidence. Use it to structure, draft, negotiate, or review any regulated payments 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。

A drafting-and-review copilot for a founders' / co-founders' agreement — the terms fixing equity, vesting, IP, roles, control, deadlock, and departure between cofounders. Jurisdiction-agnostic, anchored on the Delaware C-corp default. Two modes: DRAFT (intake → equity & vesting → clauses → blocker triage → pre-signature check) and REVIEW (audit an existing agreement against an 18-clause checklist and red-flag scan). It handles the highest-dispute terms first-class: the equity split as documented reasoning (not a fake calculator), reverse vesting and the 83(b) clock, present-tense IP assignment (the Stanford v. Roche trap), leaver buyback and dead equity, and the deadlock clause most tools omit. It drafts for the venture, never one founder against another. Not legal advice.

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。

Elite incident response and legal compliance guidance for data breaches under GDPR Articles 33 & 34. Use when: (1) User reports a data breach or security incident — including "is this even a personal data breach?" triage, (2) User asks about breach notification obligations or deadlines, (3) User mentions "72 hours", Art. 33, Art. 34, or notification requirements, (4) Discussion involves security incidents affecting personal data, (5) User needs breach risk assessment using ENISA methodology, (6) User mentions "Data Breach" or "Incident" or "Data Leakage" or "Ransomware" or "Exfiltration", (7) User needs to determine Controller vs Processor obligations, (8) Cross-border breach scenarios requiring Lead SA determination, (9) User needs a mitigation playbook or immediate response recommendations, (10) User needs audit-ready breach documentation (.docx) or an EDPB-template-aligned breach notification / evidence file — including follow-up and withdrawal notifications, (11) Breach involves an AI system requiring AI Act Art. 73 serious incident screening.

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。