1.3万 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Generate a comprehensive session report with per-model token usage (input, output, cache_read, cache_write including compaction baselines), cost breakdown via the pricing engine, tool invocations, agent hierarchy, compaction events, API errors, turn durations, and thinking block counts. Use when reviewing a specific session or summarizing activity over a date range.
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。
Generate a daily standup summary from recent Claude Code sessions — completed work grouped by project (cwd), session costs from the pricing engine, tool invocations, error/compaction/APIError events, and turn velocity metrics from session metadata (turn_count, total_turn_duration_ms).
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 structured strategic documents for small and medium businesses: SWOT analyses, lean business plans, OKRs, competitive analyses. Each mode has a defined structure and quality bar. Use whenever a business asks to articulate strategy, set goals, analyse competition, plan for growth, do a SWOT, write OKRs, or build a lean business plan. Produces actionable documents, not generic frameworks.
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 the release notes and upgrade guide for a mariadb-operator release. Given the release PR whose body lists every PR included in the release, it gathers each PR, groups the changes by relevance, and produces `docs/releases/RELEASE_<version>_HEADER.md.gotmpl` and `docs/releases/UPGRADE_<version>.md` in the format the previous releases use, then opens a PR targeting `release-<version>`. If no release PR is provided it asks for the new version and infers the changes from git history since the last tag. Use whenever the user wants release notes, an upgrade/update guide, or docs for a new mariadb-operator version — "create the release notes for 26.10.0", "write the upgrade guide", "document this release", "prepare the release PR docs" — even if they don't mention a release PR.
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 a hard-won "golden path" from the current session as a reusable Agent Skill, so future sessions start already knowing it. Use it (1) right after non-trivial debugging, after working out a multi-step operational workflow, or after rediscovering project facts you didn't know up front — e.g. how to reach the dev/prod database, where credentials and env vars live, how to deploy, run migrations, or verify a change live; and (2) whenever the user says "remember this", "save this as a skill", "make a skill for this", "don't make me re-explain this next time", or otherwise wants a workflow preserved across sessions. Proactively recognize the moment even when unprompted: if a task took several attempts before it worked, used non-obvious tooling, or is likely to recur, harvest it without asking first. Delegates to a subagent when your tool supports one, or works inline, to extract the proven procedure into a new project-local or global 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。
California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) compliance advisor — business threshold analysis, consumer rights fulfillment (access, delete, correct, opt-out of sale/sharing, limit SPI, ADMT opt-out), privacy notice drafting, service provider vs. contractor vs. third-party classification, sensitive personal information (SPI) handling, data minimization, opt-out mechanisms (including GPC), cybersecurity audits and risk assessments (live since Jan 1, 2026), ADMT obligations (effective 2026, deadline Jan 1, 2027), CPPA enforcement (Disney $2.75M, PlayOn $1.1M, Ford $375K), penalty exposure, GDPR comparison, and gap assessments for businesses operating in or targeting California residents.
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 ISO 42001 AI Management System (AIMS) compliance advisor. Use this skill whenever a user asks about ISO/IEC 42001:2023, AI governance, AI management systems, AI risk assessment, AI system impact assessment, Annex A controls for AI, Statement of Applicability for AI systems, AI policy, responsible AI, AI lifecycle management, AI incident management, AI transparency, AI bias, AI certification readiness, or any topic related to implementing or auditing an AI Management System. Also trigger for questions like "how do I become ISO 42001 certified?", "what controls does ISO 42001 require?", "how do I assess AI risk under 42001?", "what is an AIMS?", or any request involving organisational governance of AI systems, responsible AI frameworks, or AI regulatory compliance aligned to an ISO 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。
Expert guidance for FedRAMP certification and compliance under CR26 (FedRAMP Consolidated Rules for 2026). Use this skill whenever a user asks about FedRAMP authorization, ATO (Authority to Operate), cloud security for federal government, NIST SP 800-53 controls, CSP compliance, or any of the core FedRAMP document types: SSP, SAP, SAR, POA&M, CIS/CRM workbooks. Also trigger for questions about FedRAMP Certification Classes (A, B, C, D — new baseline labels: A = pilot/transitional, B = LI-SaaS/Low, C = Moderate, D = High, per NTC-0004), FedRAMP 20x (now the primary authorization pathway), OSCAL mandate (September 2026), 3PAO assessments, continuous monitoring (ConMon), gap assessments, system boundary definition, or architecture reviews for federal cloud. FedRAMP Ready retired July 28, 2026 (Legacy FedRAMP Ready). When in doubt, use this skill — it covers the full FedRAMP lifecycle from readiness through continuous monitoring.
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。
Build, run, debug, and operate applications on AWS Lambda MicroVMs — Firecracker-isolated, snapshot-resumable serverless compute environments that run inside a container with up to 8-hour lifetimes. Triggers on: Lambda MicroVMs, Firecracker isolation, snapshot-resumable compute, suspend/resume, sandboxed or untrusted code execution, AI/agent code-execution sandboxes, interactive code playgrounds and notebooks (Jupyter, REPLs), reinforcement-learning environments, multi-tenant CI executors and build runners, sessionful game or simulation servers, isolated security scanners, long-lived sessions, or port-listening servers (gRPC, WebSocket, custom TCP). For standard event-driven Lambda functions, use the aws-lambda skill instead.
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。
NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 implementation, assessment, and compliance management. Use for CSF 2.0 gap analysis, cybersecurity risk management, maturity assessment, CSF profiles, and cross-framework compliance mapping.
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。
Connects to Oxylabs remote agent browsers over the Chrome DevTools Protocol (CDP) with Playwright or Puppeteer. Built-in anti-detection, residential proxies, geo-targeting, persistent sessions and profiles, session recording and live VNC inspection for debugging. Use instead of WebFetch or a local browser whenever a site renders with JavaScript, blocks bots (DataDome, Cloudflare, Akamai), needs a real browser session, screenshots or PDFs. Covers connection, retries, error recovery and safe scraping of protected targets without any human help.
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。
GDPR Transfer Impact Assessment for Chapter V transfers under the EDPB Recommendations 01/2020 six-step methodology, the CNIL TIA Guide (January 2025), and EDPB essential guarantees. Handles transfer qualification, Art. 45 adequacy fast-tracks, Art. 46 full assessments with country profiles for 12 jurisdictions, and balanced Art. 49 derogation analysis. Outputs a Markdown report, a .docx formal TIA, and a JSON delta for RoPA interchange.
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。
Convert agreed scope into a structured matter plan — phases, workstreams, milestones, dependencies, owner assignments, and matter setup decisions. Use when planning a new matter, running a kickoff, building a workstream plan, structuring phases, setting up task codes, or producing a plan to drive status reporting. Trigger on: 'build a plan', 'matter plan', 'project plan', 'what are the phases', 'workstream plan', 'how do we sequence this', 'who owns what', 'task codes', 'matter setup', 'workstream plan', 'matter plan', 'rolling wave', 'plan the next phase', 'what comes first', 'kickoff agenda'.
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 and classify legal risks using a severity-by-likelihood framework with escalation criteria. Use when evaluating contract risk, assessing deal exposure, classifying issues by severity, or determining whether a matter needs senior counsel or outside legal 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。
Assess and classify legal risks using a severity-by-likelihood framework with escalation criteria. Use when evaluating contract risk, assessing deal exposure, classifying issues by severity, or determining whether a matter needs senior counsel or outside legal 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。
Expert ISO 42001 AI Management System (AIMS) compliance advisor. Use this skill whenever a user asks about ISO/IEC 42001:2023, AI governance, AI management systems, AI risk assessment, AI system impact assessment, Annex A controls for AI, Statement of Applicability for AI systems, AI policy, responsible AI, AI lifecycle management, AI incident management, AI transparency, AI bias, AI certification readiness, or any topic related to implementing or auditing an AI Management System. Also trigger for questions like "how do I become ISO 42001 certified?", "what controls does ISO 42001 require?", "how do I assess AI risk under 42001?", "what is an AIMS?", or any request involving organisational governance of AI systems, responsible AI frameworks, or AI regulatory compliance aligned to an ISO 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。
Assesses a legal argument, submission, or piece of structured reasoning from the perspective of a judge reading it cold under time pressure. Produces a structured seven-part assessment: what the case appears to be about, immediate points of confusion, what feels strong, what feels weak, what is assumed but unproved, a provisional confidence level (low/medium/high), and what would be needed to persuade. The skill does not rewrite, improve, or attack the argument — it tells you how it actually lands on a sceptical, experienced reader with no prior context. Works on skeleton arguments, witness statements, letters before action, position statements, academic articles, and non-legal structured reasoning.
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。
Searches the domestic courts of 122 jurisdictions — 153 databases, 49 automated — for extradition and arrest-warrant surrender decisions, each in its own language and vocabulary. Answers the question no commercial database does: how are OTHER executing states treating this requesting state, or this ground? Searching by requesting state localises its name per jurisdiction (AE becomes 'Emiratele Arabe Unite' in Romania, 'Emirati Arabi Uniti' in Italy), so the sweep finds what those courts actually wrote. Every hit passes a relevance gate; every search leaves a dated report, so the research is reconstructable months later. Use when asked what foreign courts have said about surrender to a given state, whether any European court has refused extradition on prison conditions, assurances or Article 3, for comparative extradition research, or to build a foreign-authority section of an extradition argument. Not for domestic case law of the user's own jurisdiction, and never a substitute for reading the judgment.
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 guidance for FedRAMP certification and compliance under CR26 (FedRAMP Consolidated Rules for 2026). Use this skill whenever a user asks about FedRAMP authorization, ATO (Authority to Operate), cloud security for federal government, NIST SP 800-53 controls, CSP compliance, or any of the core FedRAMP document types: SSP, SAP, SAR, POA&M, CIS/CRM workbooks. Also trigger for questions about FedRAMP Certification Classes (A, B, C, D — new baseline labels: A = pilot/transitional, B = LI-SaaS/Low, C = Moderate, D = High, per NTC-0004), FedRAMP 20x (now the primary authorization pathway), OSCAL mandate (September 2026), 3PAO assessments, continuous monitoring (ConMon), gap assessments, system boundary definition, or architecture reviews for federal cloud. FedRAMP Ready retires July 28, 2026. When in doubt, use this skill — it covers the full FedRAMP lifecycle from readiness through continuous monitoring.
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。
Generates a formal, structured AI Act compliance assessment report suitable for legal files, audit trails, and regulatory inquiries. This skill should be used when the user asks to "generate an AI Act report", "create a compliance assessment report", "document the AI Act analysis", "create a Prüfbericht", "export as Word document", or wants to consolidate prior AI Act skill outputs into a formal documented assessment.
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。
AFA design, scope-to-fee matching, negotiation preparation, health check, and scope dispute assessment for in-house legal ops teams managing outside counsel arrangements. Design fee structures (fixed, capped, collar, blended, phased, success). Assess whether scope supports a proposed AFA. Prepare commercial positions for fee negotiations. Review existing AFAs against delivery data. Assess OOS claims and build dispute response. Trigger on: 'structure the fee', 'move off hourly', 'design an AFA', 'does scope support a fixed fee?', 'negotiate the fee', 'renegotiate the arrangement', 'is our AFA holding?', 'fee health check', 'cap is being approached', 'firm is claiming OOS', 'is this in scope?', 'is this OOS?', 'AI should reduce the cost', 'blended rate vs fixed', 'collar arrangement', 'phased fees'.
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 Knowledge Engine — authoritative regulatory Q&A grounded in 70 official EU source documents (including the 2026 Commission draft guidelines on Art. 6 high-risk classification — general principles, Annex I, Annex III). Answers any question about the AI Act with article-level citations from the full regulation text, Commission guidelines, EDPB/EDPS opinions, codes of practice, harmonised standards, FRIA guides, incident templates, and sector-specific guidance. This skill should be used when the user asks about the "EU AI Act", "AI Act regulation", "Regulation 2024/1689", "KI-Verordnung", asks to "explain an AI Act article", "what does Article X say", "AI Act requirements", "AI Act penalties", "AI Act timeline", "GPAI obligations", "high-risk AI", "prohibited AI practices", "AI Act and GDPR", "fundamental rights impact assessment", "AI Act standards", "AI Act national implementation", "AI literacy", "serious incident reporting", "Digital Omnibus", "AI regulatory sandbox", or any question about EU artificial intelligence regulation. Also triggers on German terms: "KI-Gesetz", "KI-Verordnung", "Hochrisiko-KI", "KI-Kompetenz", "Grundrechte-Folgenabschaetzung", "GPAI-Verhaltenskodex". For assessment workflows that produce a classification decision rather than a knowledge answer, offer to run a structured risk-tier classification in-session.
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。
Classify AI systems under the EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) and determine compliance obligations. Use when asked to assess AI risk level, check if an AI system is prohibited, determine high-risk status, identify GPAI model obligations, map provider/deployer responsibilities, or build an AI Act compliance roadmap. Covers the full classification decision tree (Prohibited → High-Risk → Limited → Minimal → GPAI), obligations by role (provider, deployer, importer, distributor), compliance timelines, and DACH-specific considerations (German works council, BaFin, BSI, BNetzA). Triggers on phrases like "classify this AI system", "is this high-risk under the AI Act", "AI Act risk assessment", "EU AI Act compliance", "prohibited AI practice", "GPAI obligations", "AI Act timeline".
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。