2,686 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Ask questions against an open investigation log — what witnesses said, where accounts conflict, what gaps exist, what the strongest evidence is on each issue. Use when the attorney needs to query the investigation record without re-reading every entry.
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, triaging, validating, or discussing ClawHub GitHub issues or pull requests, including author context, CI, UI proof, evidence, labels, close decisions, and maintainer handoff.
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。
Read the Convex deployment's 72h insights (read limits, OCC contention), root-cause each event in code, report evidence-backed perf/cost findings with fixes.
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。
Query a running Convex app's logs + health in natural language (official MCP): failures, slow/expensive functions, deploy causality — scoped, evidence-backed, with a dashboard deep link.
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。
Route retrieval of Chinese medical guidelines, consensus statements, regulatory documents, drug information, safety notices, standards, and public-health materials through authoritative originals and verified fallback copies. Use when a canonical medical source is blocked, slow, unavailable, moved, paywalled, or difficult to parse, or when designing and auditing domestic medical-source fallback rules. Do not treat secondary summaries or reposts as independent clinical evidence.
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 needed + recommendation + evidence + tradeoffs, 把复杂材料压成可拍板的一页
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 polished, validated architecture, workflow, sequence, data-flow, and lifecycle/state diagrams as explorable standalone HTML with inline SVG, dark/light themes, optional trace motion, and PNG/JPEG/WebP/SVG/WebM export. Accept plain-language requirements or pasted Mermaid flowchart, sequenceDiagram, and stateDiagram input; inspect repository evidence when the diagram must reflect real code. Use when the user asks to visualize system architecture, infrastructure, cloud/security/network topology, technical workflows, API call sequences, request lifecycles, data pipelines, ETL/ELT, data lineage, state machines, or to convert/beautify Mermaid.
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。
Trigger: issue creation, bug reports, feature requests, or issue approval. Create and triage GitHub issues from repository evidence.
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 a game, engine or modding technique on the open web with archive-aware, rate-limit-safe searches — Wayback Machine/archive.today for dead forums (XeNTaX, Zenhax, old threads), GitHub code/repo search, Nexus/Steam Workshop/Thunderstore APIs, Reddit JSON, YouTube transcripts, plus archive snapshots as evidence. Use when starting work on a game ("how did people mod X before?"), when a documented tool/link is dead, when forum threads are login-gated (semi-auto handoff to the human), and before writing a field note so claims carry source URLs.
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。
Systematic code maturity assessment using Trail of Bits' 9-category framework. Analyzes codebase for arithmetic safety, auditing practices, access controls, complexity, decentralization, documentation, MEV risks, low-level code, and testing, then produces a scorecard with evidence-based ratings and a priority-ordered roadmap. Use when assessing or scoring the maturity of a smart contract or blockchain codebase, producing a maturity scorecard or evaluation, or judging how mature, well-tested, or well-documented such a project is against a rubric.
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。
Validates security patches with reproducible baseline-versus-patched evidence, including original exploits, root-cause variants, behavior preservation, regressions, and newly introduced security failures. Use after a patch exists and before accepting, merging, or reporting it as fixed; also use when an AI-generated patch, remediation commit, pull request, or proposed upstream fix needs adversarial post-patch validation across any 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。
Systematically verifies suspected security bugs to eliminate false positives, producing a TRUE POSITIVE or FALSE POSITIVE verdict with documented evidence for each. Use when asked whether a specific finding is real, exploitable, or a false positive, or to verify or validate a suspected vulnerability — not for hunting or discovering new bugs.
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。
Anti-forensics and evidence destruction techniques for red team operators conducting authorized engagements. Covers log clearing on Windows (wevtutil, Clear-EventLog, ETW provider patching) and Linux (journal truncation, utmp/wtmp binary editing, syslog manipulation), timestamp manipulation via Timestomp and SetMACE to defeat timeline analysis, filesystem-level anti-forensics including NTFS Alternate Data Streams for payload hiding and secure deletion with sdelete/shred, memory artifact removal to counter live forensics, disk artifact manipulation targeting MFT entries and USN journal records, network forensics evasion through encrypted C2 channels and DNS-over-HTTPS tunneling, and anti-VM/sandbox detection to avoid dynamic analysis environments. Tools: Timestomp, wevtutil, sdelete, shred, MimiPenguin, Invoke-Phant0m. Aligns to MITRE ATT&CK T1070 (Indicator Removal), T1027 (Obfuscated Files or Information), T1497 (Virtualization/Sandbox Evasion). Each technique includes the forensic artifact it targets, the destruction or manipulation method, and the defender perspective so operators understand detection gaps they must account for.
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 about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
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 a bounded real-world procedure has a deterministic happy path but brownfield, variable, or partially knowable state; when an operation must resume from verified evidence; or when deciding whether agent judgment or ordinary code should own a procedure's control loop.
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 configuring `rig watchdog` policies, authoring wake/refocus/alignment-checkpoint messages, or choosing the right intervention level for a stale-owner situation. The 3-level continuity-check stack (wake / refocus / alignment-checkpoint), the discipline that prevents cadence pollution and bureaucracy theater, and the artifact-pool loop-edge pattern for evidence-aware waking.
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。
YC-style product validation using six forcing questions. Pressure-tests a feature idea before it becomes a requirement — ensuring real demand, a clear wedge, and evidence behind assumptions.
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。
Systematically explore and test a web application to find bugs, UX issues, and other problems. Use when asked to "dogfood", "QA", "exploratory test", "find issues", "bug hunt", "test this app/site/platform", or review the quality of a web application. Produces a structured report with full reproduction evidence -- step-by-step screenshots, repro videos, and detailed repro steps for every issue -- so findings can be handed directly to the responsible teams.
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 or critique a product flow, journey, workflow, funnel, onboarding path, checkout path, settings path, screen, or multi-step product experience by capturing screenshots first, then reporting UX, design, and accessibility findings inline from that evidence. Use Figma only when the user explicitly asks for a board. Use when the user asks to audit, review, critique, inspect, assess, analyze, evaluate, or give feedback on a product experience.
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。
Submit compact Open Targets Platform GraphQL requests for target, disease, drug, variant, study, and search data, including associated-disease datasource heatmap matrices. Use when a user wants concise Open Targets summaries or per-datasource evidence context
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。
Submit compact EpiGraphDB API requests for ontology, literature, MR, gene-drug, and support-path evidence. Use when a user wants concise EpiGraphDB summaries
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。
Submit compact CIViC GraphQL requests for cancer variant interpretation schema inspection and targeted evidence retrieval. Use when a user wants concise CIViC summaries
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, reply to, and resolve Google Drive comments on Docs, Sheets, Slides, and Drive files with evidence-backed location context. Use when the user asks to leave comments, review a file with comments, respond to comment threads, or resolve Drive comments.
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。
Analyze product or business data to support a decision or recommendation. Use when a decision depends on metric-backed evidence, such as choosing a direction, prioritizing an opportunity, evaluating a change, segmenting users, sizing tradeoffs, or deciding what to do next.
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。