「organization」の検索結果

SEO keyword clustering with topic organization, content hub architecture, internal linking strategies. Use for content strategy, keyword research, pillar page structures, or encountering cluster organization, hub architecture, internal linking errors.

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, refine, compare, and when needed validate distinctive names for startups, AI products, developer tools, protocols, open-source projects, apps, product families, local businesses, services, companies, nonprofits, and other organizations. Use when asked to name or rename a business, brand, product, venture, shop, studio, or organization; derive a name from an existing project or concept; create a company and product naming system; compare candidates; or check company, domain, package, repository, marketplace, or trademark conflicts. Default to a fast no-browse creative pass; use current validation when the user requests availability or research, or is choosing a final name. Do not claim legal clearance, purchase domains, or present stale or unverified availability as fact.

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。

Automatically organizes files in a directory into a clean structure based on configurable rules — by file type, date, project, or priority — with support for duplicate detection, naming conventions, and archival strategies. Use when the user requests file organization or provides relevant inputs for this workflow.

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。

Clerk is a hosted authentication and user-management service with drop-in UI components, social login, email/password, organizations, RBAC and webhooks. Use when adding sign-in to Next.js, React, or Express apps, protecting routes with clerkMiddleware, setting up multi-tenant organizations and roles, or syncing Clerk users to your own database.

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。

Structures fresh-start accounting analysis with reorganization value allocation, new basis determination, and emergence balance sheet. Use when modeling fresh-start accounting, preparing emergence financials, or allocating reorganization value.

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 leadership team capacity to scale with organizational design review, key person risk, and executive bench analysis. Use when evaluating management scalability, identifying talent gaps, or assessing organizational readiness.

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。

当用户是管理者/创始人/领导者，面临企业增长停滞、文化僵化、战略转型困难、或在问"如何推动组织变革""企业文化怎么改""使命愿景怎么定"时激活。 核心信号：用户在描述组织层面的问题，且已经意识到"不是业务问题而是底层问题"。 不适用于：个人成长问题（除非明确映射到组织场景）、纯战术层面的业务调整。

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 you need Liberty91 platform intelligence — what actually happened (deduplicated Threat Events with every source, Admiralty reliability/credibility and verification stage), whether an IOC is already known to your account, the canonical threat library (actors, malware, vulnerabilities, clusters, ATT&CK TTPs), alert matches, or which of your customer organizations an occurrence affects — or when you need to push intelligence back: ingesting your own report, generating an intelligence package, or uploading an organization document. Also supplies event provenance fields, when the platform returns them, and Threat Library alias resolution to /source-provenance and /quality-of-information-check. Two-way, first-party integration. Commonly invoked by /ip-investigation and friends, /ioc-enrichment-workflow, /threat-actor-profiling, /campaign-tracking and /vulnerability-intelligence. Reads $LIBERTY91_API_KEY.

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。

Executes comprehensive red team exercises that simulate real-world adversary operations against an organization's people, processes, and technology. The red team operates with stealth as a primary objective, employing the full attack lifecycle from initial reconnaissance through objective completion while testing the organization's detection and response capabilities. This differs from penetration testing by focusing on adversary emulation rather than vulnerability identification. Activates for requests involving red team exercise, adversary simulation, adversary emulation, or full-scope offensive security 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。

"Apply the Knowledge-Based View (Grant, 1996) and Nonaka and Takeuchi's SECI model to analyze how organizations create, transfer, and integrate knowledge for competitive advantage. Use this skill when the user needs to design knowledge management systems, understand why knowledge transfer fails across teams, evaluate knowledge creation processes, or when they ask 'how do we capture tacit knowledge', 'why does knowledge stay siloed', or 'how can we turn individual expertise into organizational capability'.".

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。

"Apply Institutional Theory (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983) to analyze how coercive, mimetic, and normative isomorphic pressures shape organizational structures and practices. Use this skill when the user needs to explain why organizations in the same field look alike, evaluate whether a practice was adopted for legitimacy vs efficiency, analyze regulatory or social pressures on strategy, or when they ask 'why do all firms in this industry do the same thing', 'is this best practice or just conformity', or 'how do regulations shape our structure'.".

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。

"Apply the three-level framework of digital transformation — Digitization, Digitalization, and Digital Transformation — to diagnose and plan organizational change enabled by digital technologies. Use this skill when the user needs to assess an organization's digital maturity, distinguish between automating processes versus transforming business models, plan a DX roadmap, or when they ask 'where are we on digital transformation', 'is this digitization or real transformation', or 'how do we build a DX strategy'.".

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。

"Apply organizational ambidexterity theory to balance exploration and exploitation activities. Use this skill when the user needs to diagnose whether an organization is over-exploiting or over-exploring, design structures that support both innovation and efficiency, or evaluate the tension between short-term performance and long-term renewal.".

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。

Manages end-to-end workflow for multi-organization amicus coalition briefs in appellate courts. Covers single-pen drafting governance, position alignment, conflict resolution, documented sign-offs, FRAP 29/Rule 37.6 disclosures, FRAP 26.1 corporate disclosures, cover formatting for multiple amici, and compliant filing. Use when coordinating coalition amicus briefs, managing sign-offs, drafting joint friend-of-court briefs, handling multi-amici filing, or resolving inter-organization conflicts. Triggers on phrases like "coalition brief," "12 orgs joining this amicus," or "coordinate the amicus."

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。

Application architecture patterns and code organization — clean architecture, hexagonal architecture, feature-based structure, dependency inversion, module boundaries, SOLID principles at module scale. Activate on "clean architecture", "hexagonal architecture", "feature-based structure", "dependency inversion", "module boundaries", "architecture pattern", "folder structure", "fat controller", "circular dependency", "IoC container". NOT for microservice decomposition (use microservices-patterns) or database schema design (use database-design-patterns).

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。

Prepare a defense-contractor environment for CMMC Level 2 certification: scope CUI and FCI, implement the 110 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 2 security requirements across 14 families, compute the SPRS score with the DoD Assessment Methodology, manage a compliant POA&M, and ready the organization for a C3PAO assessment. Use when an organization handles Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) under a DoD contract, when a contract carries DFARS clause 252.204-7012/7019/7020/7021, when preparing for or responding to a CMMC assessment, when computing or improving an SPRS score, when building a System Security Plan or POA&M for 800-171, or when scoping which systems are in the CUI boundary. Keywords: CMMC, CMMC Level 2, NIST 800-171, SP 800-171 Rev 2, CUI, FCI, SPRS, DFARS 7012, C3PAO, POA&M, System Security Plan, DoD Assessment Methodology, 110 controls, defense industrial base, DIB, FedRAMP equivalency.

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。

This skill should be used when providing ITIL 4-based IT service management consulting. Use this when organizations need guidance on implementing ITIL 4 practices, improving service management maturity, optimizing IT operations, or aligning IT services with business objectives. Provides tailored recommendations based on department, scenario, and organizational context using comprehensive ITIL 4 knowledge.

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。

システムログを分析してエラーの根本原因を特定し、段階的に深堀りしていくデバッグ専門家スキル。 アプリケーションログ、システムログ、クラウドサービスログなど様々な形式に対応。 5 Whys、タイムライン分析、Fishbone分析などのRCA（根本原因分析）手法を用いて 問題の本質を突き止め、再発防止策まで提案する。 Use when analyzing system logs to find error root causes, debugging application issues, or performing technical post-mortem analysis with log data. For organizational incident management processes (post-incident review, corrective action plans, incident reports without log data), use incident-rca-specialist instead. Triggers: "analyze this log", "find the root cause", "debug this error", "why is this failing", "log analysis", "what caused this crash", "troubleshoot this issue"

インシデント発生後の振り返りと根本原因分析を体系的に実施するスキル。 ログファイル解析や技術デバッグが必要な場合は log-debugger を使用すること。 本スキルはインシデント管理プロセス（タイムライン構築、影響評価、 是正措置計画、再発防止策）に特化する。ログデータの分析ではなく、 組織的な振り返りプロセスと是正措置の策定が主目的である。 Use when conducting post-incident reviews without log analysis, creating corrective action plans, or performing organizational root cause analysis focused on process improvement. NOT for log file debugging. Triggers: "post-incident review", "corrective action plan", "incident report作成", "再発防止策", "RCAレポート", "是正措置", "インシデント振り返り"

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。

Manage MongoDB Atlas Organizations as Azure ARM resources using Azure.ResourceManager.MongoDBAtlas SDK. Use when creating, updating, listing, or deleting MongoDB Atlas organizations through Azure M...

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 working with Clerk — clerk authentication and user management platform covering users, sessions, organizations, invitations, and sign-in methods. Use when analyzing user growth, monitoring authentication health, reviewing organization membership, managing Clerk users, or auditing sign-in patterns.

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 and migrate tests using the Swift Testing framework with @Test, @Suite, #expect, #require, confirmation, parameterized tests, test tags, traits, withKnownIssue, XCTest UI testing, XCUITest, test plan, mocking, test doubles, testable architecture, snapshot testing, async test patterns, test organization, and test-driven development in Swift. Use when writing or migrating tests with Swift Testing framework, implementing parameterized tests, working with test traits, converting XCTest to Swift Testing, or setting up test organization and mocking patterns.

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 the user wants all 16 personality types (16-minds plugin) to vote on a proposal — yes/no/abstain — to see stakeholder distribution, detect hidden objections, or simulate organizational consensus. Triggers on Japanese phrases like 「全人格で投票」「16人格に賛否を聞いて」「ステークホルダーシミュ」「これ通せそう？」, English equivalents like "vote with all 16 minds" / "stakeholder simulation", or `--vote` flag on 16-minds commands. Different from /minds (which is for opinion divergence) — this is for binary judgment aggregation.