「cis」の検索結果

Use whenever the user wants to find, shortlist, vet, or enrich US cybersecurity firms — pen-testing/red team, security audits, vCISO, SOC 2 readiness, incident response, managed SOC, IAM, cloud security, and AppSec. Triggers on "find me a pen-testing firm for our SOC 2 audit", "shortlist three vCISO services for our healthcare-tech startup", "we need an incident response retainer", or "pull contact info for these 8 security firm domains", even when described indirectly (we got breached, prepare us for the compliance audit, get us SOC 2 ready). Drives the ServiceGraph API (api.servicegraph.co) — a 100k+ US firm catalog filterable by industry, services, location, size, ratings. Skip in-house security hires, "how do I patch CVE-X" or "configure firewall Y" DIY questions, security-product reviews (CrowdStrike vs SentinelOne, etc.), generic security knowledge questions, consumer/personal security advice, non-US firms, individual freelancers and bug-bounty hunters.

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 reviewing, writing, or debugging Go code under exercises/part2/ (and matching embedded code in docs/part2/**/*.mdx). Thinks hard about correctness, idiomatic Go, error handling, resource cleanup, concurrency, and — crucially — what the tests would catch: edge cases, races, leaks, timeouts, and port conflicts. Knows the repo's module-mode quirk (GO111MODULE=off) and which dirs carry go.mod.

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 writing, expanding, rewriting, or drafting any chapter (.mdx) or Go exercise for this book. Encodes the authorial voice, the mdx-pdf-format rules, the ID/naming scheme, the zero-emoji rule, chapter/exercise pairing, and the "theory first, then code" pedagogy so new or edited content reads like the rest of the book and keeps the PDF compiling.

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。

Validate and improve GitHub Well-Architected Framework (WAF) documentation under the content/ folder for architectural correctness, decision quality, explicit trade-offs, and actionable guidance. Use this when reviewing pull requests, markdown files, or draft content in content/ to ensure recommendations are technically sound, context-aware, and guide readers toward correct architecture and design decisions.

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。

Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates documentation (CONTEXT.md, ADRs) inline as decisions crystallise. Use when the user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's language and documented decisions.

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。

Run CIS benchmark checks against cluster nodes and control planes when an agent needs a narrow Kubernetes hardening audit, not a general platform listing.

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 a research-paper figure Skill Factory: build, patch, package, or use reusable specialized paper-figure-making skills from lawful literature/corpus evidence. Generated skills must use a specialized-skill-first workflow, full-feasible local PDF coverage where available, startup-plan-only first replies, target-paper candidate/final image isolation, mandatory image-embedded visual-structure explanation, mandatory non-target concept/modeling example display for abstract visual decisions, saved subtype/style illustration atlases, ChatGPT web Create image / ChatGPT Images 2.0 rendering, Codex $imagegen-first rendering, sample-image transfer rules, all-step/current-position state footers, and a mandatory first-round diverse candidate board followed by P6b/P6c paper-local best-practice optimization before final prompt construction.

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。

Template skill for a leadership-transition / executive cockpit — when someone steps into or covers a leadership role and needs to not drop anything. Produces a handoff doc + decision-rights map, an "open loops" tracker, a team-comms cadence, and a recurring report/update drafter. Trigger on "/exec-cockpit", "handoff doc", "decision-rights map", "open loops tracker", "cover for <role>", "interim <role>". Customize the placeholders to your situation.

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。

Cross-validate code, architecture or design decisions using a second model. Use for critical decisions, complex refactoring, security reviews.

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。

Record a diamond's next decision (set_target; start_experiment and commit_to_build; release; close; an L0's state_purpose or review). Runs the theory gates each decision needs, validates evidence, and at close runs the executable Definition of Done checklist.

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。

Print your own north-star row from your own record, and nothing else. Reads .claude/harness/decision-log.md, the canvas and the hook logs in this project; prints one line (decisions before the first source file, of which citing outside evidence, kills before code, sessions). Sends nothing anywhere. Opt-in; paste the line where you like or not at all.

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 or update an ADR under `docs/ADR/` for architectural decisions, dependency changes, data-model changes, or cross-cutting policy shifts. Use when the user asks to write, update, or document an ADR, record a design decision, capture architecture trade-offs, or justify a repo-wide technical policy.

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 any core for first-run planning intake — Phase 0 runs the vendored BMAD-METHOD planning shelf, shared by every core, and Phase 1 (mining `04-prd.md` into intent records plus the Add-ons/sync-and-remote-entities decision) is full-stack-app's and pwa-app's shared procedure — identical mechanics, a different decision at step 5/8. Phase 0 also defines compressed intake, the path a user's explicit "just build it" choice takes on full-stack-app, pwa-app, authored, and copywriting cores: one batched round of questions in place of the shelf, writing a thinned archive at the same paths so Phase 1 (or, on copywriting, that core's own mining step), `ux-planner`, and the Re-entry pass all keep their documented source. Also use for the Re-entry pass, which mines new scope into additional intents without re-running the shelf, on any core with a module axis to add an intent to (full-stack-app, pwa-app, authored) — landing-page has none, so its own new-scope path runs through `hedgehog-landing-loop`'s Correction Protocol instead. Invoked by the `planner` agent, which decides the path; don't run standalone. landing-page runs this skill's Phase 0 on first run, then mines the same archive through `hedgehog-landing-loop`'s own planning-intake section, that core's counterpart to this skill's Phase 1. copywriting runs this skill's Phase 0 the same way (full or compressed), then mines the same archive through `hedgehog-copywriting-loop`'s own planning-intake section into a what/audience/register brief — no module axis, so its own new-scope path runs through that loop's Correction Protocol rather than the Re-entry pass below. An authored core runs this skill's Phase 0, then `hedgehog-core-design`, then this skill's Phase 1 mining against the designed layer sequence. A brownfield adoption (`hedgehog-adopt`) never runs this skill's shelf at all — the drivers BMAD elicits are already settled facts of a repo that already exists.

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 post-offering stabilization with overallotment option exercise, market support, and penalty bid mechanisms. Use when managing stabilization, exercising greenshoe options, or analyzing aftermarket support.

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 NPV, IRR, and payback models for capital investment decisions with hurdle rate calibration and risk adjustment. Use when evaluating capital investments, comparing project returns, or building capital allocation 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。

Evaluates regulatory decision impact with approval probability, timeline analysis, and outcome scenario modeling for event-driven positions. Use when analyzing regulatory events, evaluating FDA/FCC/DOJ decisions, or modeling regulatory outcomes.

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 best practices and synthesize into design decisions for artifact creation. Invoke BEFORE any creator skill to ensure research-backed decisions.

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。

Feed actual task results back into agent memory for calibration. Compares predicted vs actual outcomes, records accuracy scores, and tracks estimation quality, prediction quality, and decision quality over time to improve future agent performance.

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。

Decision matrix for selecting multi-agent topologies (Supervisor, Swarm, Hierarchical, Conductor) with token economics, failure modes, and escalation paths

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。

N-round opposing-stance debates for trade-off analysis. Assigns pro/con roles to agents, runs structured debate rounds with quality scoring, and produces a moderator synthesis with confidence-rated recommendation. Generalizable to architecture, technology, security, and design decisions.

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。

Trains the HUMAN user's critical thinking through four modes: drill (argument-analysis items with a single defensible answer, judge stance), scene (Socratic exploration of synthetic scenes or user-supplied material, no verdicts on interpretations; includes a configure track — design the information request and verification plan for a decision before any analysis), expedition (guided audit of impossible-tier problems from verified packs), and detective (a runtime-generated multi-layer case worked as an escape room, guide-and-judge stance). Use when the user wants to practice critical thinking, analyze arguments, hunt assumptions, examine bias, train reasoning, or decide what information a decision needs first. Triggers: critical thinking practice, train my thinking, drill, scene, byom, configure, information plan, what would I need to know, spot manipulation tactics, scam literacy, 批判思考練習, 話術辨識, detective, 查案, 破案, 偵探.

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。

Guides selection of identity, reasoning, and output approaches for Claude prompts based on task characteristics. Trigger on: "help me choose an approach," "which approach fits this task," "recommend a prompt pattern," "compare reasoning methods," "map this task to the right approach," "what combination of approaches," "which identity fits," "which reasoning method." Also trigger on symptom-phrased: "my prompt feels generic," "I don't know which approach to use," "my output lacks domain depth." Covers decision-tree logic across 8 identity approaches, 18 reasoning variants, and 10 output formats. After selection, use the relevant catalog skill if available to retrieve full templates. Activate whenever approach-selection across multiple categories is the primary decision. Do NOT use when the user already names a specific approach to retrieve (use the relevant catalog skill directly if available) or for evaluating existing prompts (use rootnode-prompt-validation if available).

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。

Specialized software engineering prompt methodology for Claude. Use when building prompts for system design, code review, incident response, security analysis, API design, architecture decisions, RFCs, ADRs, runbooks, or technical leadership. Trigger on: "build a prompt for code review," "system design prompt," "SRE prompt," "security review prompt," "incident response prompt," "API design prompt," "architecture decision prompt," "RFC prompt," "runbook prompt." Provides 11 tested approaches across identity, reasoning, and output for engineering analysis. Do NOT use for general coding help, writing code, or debugging — this builds prompts that shape engineering analysis, not code itself. Do NOT use for evaluating existing prompts (use rootnode-prompt-validation if available).

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。

Tested output format specifications for Claude prompts. Use when the user wants a specific deliverable structure — retrieving, reviewing, customizing, or building output formatting. Trigger on: "give me the Executive Brief format," "show me the output template for," "I need the Decision Matrix structure," "show me available output formats," "build a custom output format for." Provides 10 ready-to-use structures (executive briefs, technical designs, research summaries, implementation plans, decision matrices, competitive analyses, post-mortems, stakeholder updates, strategic memos, process documentation) plus a custom template, with per-section length guidance and format constraints tested against Claude formatting defaults. If unsure which format fits, use rootnode-block-selection first if available. Do NOT use for evaluating existing prompts (use rootnode-prompt-validation if available) or choosing reasoning/identity approaches (use rootnode-block-selection if available).

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。