3,112 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
METAINFORMANT rules for directory docs/comparisons. Use when editing, adding tests, or reviewing code under this path. Read the linked AGENTS.md first; use uv only, write outputs to output/, real implementations.
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。
Knowledge base synthesized from the Guide to the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge (SEBoK) v2.14 by the BKCASE Project. Use for the established systems-engineering canon: SE fundamentals and foundations (systems science, systems thinking, the systems approach, modelling/MBSE), the life cycle (ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288/24748/24774 process, development & agile approaches, model selection/tailoring), technical management, concept definition, architecture/realization (the Vee), V&V, maintenance/sustainment, SE standards, and the application contexts (product, service, enterprise, systems-of-systems, healthcare), plus enabling SE (business/team/individual), related disciplines, quality attributes/specialty engineering, implementation examples, and emerging knowledge. Good for grounding background, vocabulary, and prior-art positions across all eight SEBoK Parts. SCOPE LIMITS: this pack is SEBoK v2.14 only (released 2026-05-18); it synthesizes and signposts rather than reproducing the source — it does not reproduce ISO/IEC/IEEE standard text, is a curated guide (not a complete textbook), and is thin on AI-integration depth (Part 8 is a staging area, not settled practice). LICENCE: content is CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 — non-commercial use only, attribution to the BKCASE Project required, share-alike obligations carry forward.
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。
Synthesized reference notes from three US Government vehicle-safety sources: NHTSA Cybersecurity Best Practices for the Safety of Modern Vehicles (updated 2022, final), NHTSA Automated Driving Systems 2.0: A Vision for Safety (2017), and a 16-section selection of 49 CFR Part 571 (FMVSS) pinned at eCFR versioner date 2025-01-01. Use for voluntary vehicle cybersecurity practices, the ADS 2.0 twelve priority safety design elements, and FMVSS occupant protection, brakes/stability/lighting, and fuel/EV integrity requirements. Not ISO 26262, not ASPICE, not ISO/SAE 21434, not UNECE R155/R156, not SAE J3016, and not the full Part 571; the FMVSS material is a selection of vehicle-level minimum performance standards, not a process 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。
Knowledge base from NIST SP 800-160 Vol 1 (Engineering Trustworthy Secure Systems) and Vol 2 (Developing Cyber-Resilient Systems). Use for systems security engineering (SSE): the three SSE framework contexts (problem/solution/trustworthiness), the 30+ design principles for trustworthy secure design, trustworthiness and assurance/assurance cases, security across the ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 life-cycle process groups, and the Vol 2 cyber-resiliency engineering framework — 4 goals (anticipate/withstand/recover/adapt), objectives, 14 techniques, implementation approaches, and design principles for the APT/adverse-conditions threat model. Bridges systems engineering and the NIST security cluster (CSF/SSDF/RMF). Does not reproduce ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 process text, nor cover SP 800-53 control catalogs in depth.
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。
Knowledge base from the NASA Digital Engineering Acquisition Framework Handbook (NASA-HDBK-1004). Use for acquiring digital/model-based data under contract: the Data Requirements Description (DRD) instrument and the Appendix A DRD suite (TDP, MBx, CDMP, CSA, CR, FCA/PCA, SDT, EMDAL, REF, MRI); the Data Type 1-5 control scale; SOW/RFP/Cost-Volume contract language and data rights (FAR/DFARS, Table 3 license categories); the Requirements Exchange Format (REF/ReqIF, UUID schema) and Master Records Index; model-based data definition (MBSE, CAD/PMI, M&S credibility, BOM, release-state mapping, PLM); digital data collaboration, the four owned architectures, and interoperability standards (MIL-STD-31000, STEP/ISO 10303, ASME Y14); the four MBE interoperability use cases; and MBE Plan development. Scope is the acquisition and contracting side of digital engineering. Does not reproduce ISO/STEP/ASME/MIL-STD/SAE standard text, and the companion NASA-HDBK-1009A carries the deeper digital-engineering practitioner detail this handbook defers to.
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。
Knowledge base from the FAA System Safety Handbook (Dec 30, 2000). Use for system safety as a specialty within systems engineering: the five-step safety risk management process (mandated by FAA Order 8040.4 and the AMS), the severity-by-likelihood risk matrix and acceptance bands, the Safety Order of Precedence, system-description models (5M, SHEL(L)), the hazard-analysis activities (PHL/PHA/RHA/SSHA/SHA/O&SHA/HHA), integrated system hazard analysis, the analysis techniques (FTA, FMEA/FMECA, Fault Hazard, Common Cause, Sneak Circuit, Energy Trace), closed-loop hazard tracking (Safety Action Record), and the specialty domains the handbook covers — acquisition-lifecycle safety and contracting (OSA/CSA/SSPP/ISSPP), software safety (control-capability ranking, SHCM, DO-178B), test & evaluation safety, facilities safety, commercial launch safety (AST licensing, expected casualty, MPL/DAMP), system safety training, and Operational Risk Management (ORM) with human/organizational factors. Scope limits: this is a year-2000 FAA how-to; it predates the modern FAA/ICAO Safety Management System (SMS) and Just Culture regulatory frameworks, and many cited orders, advisory circulars, and launch-licensing rules have since been restructured. It is FAA/NAS-centric, leans on MIL-STD-882C, and does not define the SE life-cycle processes themselves (use nasa-npr-7123 / dau-se-guidebook) or reproduce third-party standard text (MIL-STD-882, DO-178B, ISO/IEC/IEEE).
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。
Signpost (not a knowledge pack) for the functional safety standards landscape: IEC 61508, ISO 26262, ISO/SAE 21434, UL 4600, SAE J3016, and ASPICE. Contains NO source content: designation, edition, owner, status, and an official catalogue URL only. Use when you need to identify or locate a functional safety standard. All six are paywalled or carry no redistribution grant and cannot be packaged; open paths point at US Government packs, which are not equivalents.
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。
多模型编排与模型切换策略。基于评分的模型选择、跨 Agent 委派（Gemini、Codex、Ollama）、Advisor 配对、升级触发器、权限矩阵与成本效率优化。
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。
Многомодельная оркестрация и стратегия переключения моделей. Выбор моделей на основе оценки (score), делегирование между агентами (Gemini, Codex, Ollama), связывание с advisor, триггеры эскалации, матрица разрешений и оптимизация затрат.
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。
Reads two or more supplier, bid or tender responses against a requirements list and returns a DRAFT comparison pack: a requirement-by-supplier matrix, gaps per supplier, clarification questions and neutral observations, for an evaluation panel. Never scores, weights, ranks or recommends a winner; the award stays with the panel. Use when the user asks to "compare these bids", "matrix the tender responses against our requirements", "collate the RFQ replies", "show me where each supplier falls short" or "draft clarification questions for the bidders". Do not use for scoring or weighting against agreed criteria, use supplier-evaluation-matrix instead, or for writing the requirements, use rfp-requirements-pack instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Compares one clause (liability, termination, confidentiality or any other) across several contracts, templates or successive versions and returns a DRAFT comparison table: verbatim clause text per document, the clause split into elements with every difference from the baseline highlighted and categorised, and neutral questions for counsel. Never says which wording is better or enforceable. Use when the user asks to "compare the liability caps across these five supplier contracts", "line up the termination clause in these three drafts", "show how the confidentiality clause changed between versions", "contrast this clause with our template" or "benchmark the indemnity wording across our customer agreements". Do not use for a whole-contract review, use contract-review-pack instead; for screening one NDA against standard positions, use nda-triage. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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 a DRAFT weighted supplier evaluation matrix from supplier responses and the panel's agreed criteria, weights and scale: a provisional score per cell with the quoted evidence and anchor behind it, a register of every missing or partial answer, and calibration and sensitivity flags. Provisional for panel moderation; never recommends, awards or disqualifies. Use when the user asks to score, weight or rank supplier, bid or tender responses against agreed criteria, for example "score these bids", "build the evaluation matrix", "weight the tender responses" or "rank the suppliers against our criteria". Do not use for a side-by-side comparison without scores, use rfp-comparison-pack instead; for writing the criteria, use rfp-requirements-pack instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Compares a changed HR policy with the version it replaces and drafts a clause-by-clause change log, a plain-language DRAFT employee briefing, a manager FAQ answered only from the policy text with clause references, and a list of open questions the people team must settle before release. Use when the user asks to explain, announce, summarise or brief a policy change, a new policy version or an updated handbook section, or says "what changed in the leave policy", "brief managers on the new handbook section" or "compare the old and new versions of this policy". Do not use for a single announcement with no version comparison, use announcement-drafter instead; for an FAQ from documents that are not a policy change, use faq-builder; for contract clauses, use clause-comparison-table. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Flags where a P&ID draft raises a process safety question and points to the candidate evidence an engineer would review (HAZOP register, relief study, SIL assessment, isolation philosophy), as questions and quoted passages with UNKNOWN for missing documents, plus safety functions, relief devices and isolation requirements carried over as stated. Never rates, sizes, classifies, resolves or declares protection adequate. Use when the user asks to "write the process safety flags", "produce the process safety section of the P&ID enrichment", "list which protection questions this P&ID raises" or "map the HAZOP and relief study evidence to the draft" after gate G2, once the piping and instrumentation sections exist. Do not use for proposing loops, alarms or trips from the control philosophy, use instrumentation-and-control-enrichment instead; do not use for checking identifiers, use tagging-and-numbering. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Keep serialized build-in-public content continuous: read one canon file of season, arcs, beats and loops and say which narrative beat to advance next, so episodes chain into a series. Pairs with the episode adapter, which does the writing. Triggers: "/reality-show", "season state", "what arcs are open".
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 "[Competitor] alternative" and comparison pages for developer tools. Build honest, high-converting comparison content that ranks for competitive search terms.
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。
マルチテナント前提の設計差分から、テナント分離（データ/権限/リソース/障害影響）の抜けや越境リスクを検出
Detects Vitest test-isolation hazards: unrestored vi.spyOn/vi.mock without afterEach cleanup or restoreMocks config, un-awaited resolves/rejects assertions, and shared mutable module state across tests.
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。
テストは存在するがアサーションが実質何も検証しておらず、実装が壊れても落ちない（常に PASS する）構造を diff-time で検出する。Check 1 missing assertion（テスト本体にアサーションが無い）、Check 2 tautological assertion（定数同士・入力自身・mock の戻り値自身を assert し SUT に依存しない）、Check 3 nonexistent expected literal（assertDontSee / assertNotContains 等の期待文字列が対象ファイルに実在しない）、Check 4 stale expected value（同一 diff で対象の出力が変わったのに期待値が据え置き）、Check 5 unscoped expectation（汎用的な属性・クラスを応答全体に対して assert し対象要素にスコープされていない）、Check 6 swallowed failure（例外の握り潰しや到達しない位置のアサーションで判定が成立しない）、の 6 Check を対象とする report-only。テストの有無は test-existence、未テスト経路の量は coverage-gap、非決定性は flaky-test、命名は test-naming、JS/TS の un-awaited resolves / rejects は vitest-mock-isolation、tdd-ledger artifact ベースの RED/GREEN 検証は plangate-tdd-evidence、.only / .skip / xit / @ts-ignore と空の catch は heuristic-review.mjs の決定論検出器へ委譲する
在授权渗透测试中挖掘 Web 缓存投毒与缓存欺骗（web cache poisoning / cache deception）。当目标前有缓存层（CDN/反代/Varnish）且缓存键未覆盖某些影响响应的输入（unkeyed header/参数/解析差异）时使用——典型场景：X-Forwarded-Host 反射进响应被缓存、unkeyed 参数、缓存键规范化差异、静态扩展名欺骗缓存私有页。适用目标类型 Web / CDN。触发场景包括用户说"测下缓存投毒""X-Forwarded-Host 能不能毒缓存""缓存欺骗看一下""unkeyed 输入有没有"。输出：投毒/欺骗可行性 + 被缓存证据的 finding（含 killed 记录）。
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。
Implements data visualization charts in Flutter using the fl_chart package (v1.2.0). Supports LineChart, BarChart, PieChart, ScatterChart, RadarChart, and CandlestickChart with implicit animations, touch interactivity, and pan/zoom transformations. Use when building any Flutter chart, graph, or data visualization — including line graphs for trends, bar charts for comparisons, pie/donut charts for proportions, scatter plots for distributions, radar charts for multi-axis comparisons, or candlestick charts for financial OHLC data. Also use when customizing chart axes, titles, tooltips, grid lines, touch callbacks, chart animations, or chart zoom/pan behavior.
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。
When the user wants to create competitor comparison or alternative pages for SEO and sales enablement. Also use when the user mentions 'alternative page,' 'vs page,' 'competitor comparison,' 'compa...
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 agent needs recursive reasoning, episodic memory retrieval, internet learning, or world-model prediction. Mini-OpenAmer: the 2B hybrid Mamba core with 9 tools, running 24/7 on Damir's laptop.
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。
Plan, execute, and document validation, verification, and transfer of analytical procedures under the governing framework - ICH Q2(R2) and Q14, USP <1220>/<1225>/<1226>, ICH M10 bioanalytical, CLSI EP, or ISO/IEC 17025. Use for HPLC, LC-MS/MS, GC, CE, ICP-MS, dissolution, qNMR, qPCR, NIR, and ligand binding or cell-based assays whenever the question is whether a procedure is fit for its intended purpose. Triggers include "method validation", "analytical method validation", "AMV", "validation protocol", "acceptance criteria", "linearity", "reportable range", "accuracy and precision", "repeatability", "intermediate precision", "recovery", "LOD", "LOQ", "detection limit", "quantitation limit", "specificity", "robustness", "method transfer", "method comparison", "Deming", "Passing-Bablok", "Bland-Altman", "equivalence testing", "OOS investigation", "ICH Q2", "Q2(R2)", "Q14", "USP 1225", "ICH M10", "incurred sample reanalysis", "ISR", "CLSI EP", and any request to show that an assay works.
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。