「rd」の検索結果

First-principles strategy — strip away conventional assumptions and find the theoretical maximum for your business. Three modes. Diagnostic mode runs a full session (45+ min) to define your theoretical maximum, map the gap honestly, classify constraints, invert for failure modes, set strategic intent, and work backwards to your first intervention. Review mode (15-20 min) checks whether your theoretical maximum has shifted, whether the gap has changed, and whether you're still climbing the right peak. Alert mode defines constraint-shift, peak-shift, and local-peak triggers that tell you when to reassess. Use when someone is stuck optimising incrementally, when conventional wisdom is driving strategy, when a new technology or regulation changes what's physically possible, or when you suspect the business is climbing a local peak. Integrates with company-context.md. Based on practice by Eterdis (eterdis.com).

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。

Continuous environmental scanning across six PESTEL categories — Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Environmental, Legal. Not a one-time analysis but an ongoing radar. Three modes. Diagnostic mode runs a full scan and prioritises forces by impact, speed, and reversibility. Review mode checks the watch list monthly for movement and new signals. Alert mode defines concrete monitoring triggers for each top force. Use whenever someone wants to understand external forces acting on their business, assess macro risk, prepare for planning, or check whether the world has moved since last time they looked. Connects to the strategy map (forces act on the chain) and Wardley Map (forces drive component evolution). Based on practice by Eterdis (eterdis.com).

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。

Track Two / internal innovation system for running small, fast experiments outside the core business. Runs in three modes — Diagnostic for designing the full Protoloop from scratch (intake channels, loop structure, team, exit paths), Review for running the monthly heartbeat meeting (loop-by-loop decisions, forward-loading, portfolio health), and Alert Triggers for defining tripwires that protect, feed, and maintain momentum in the system. Updates company-context.md after every run. Triggers on questions about innovation pipelines, intrapreneurship, Track Two strategy, experimentation systems, handling ideas that don't fit the core business, or building systematic exploration alongside exploitation. Based on 20 years of practice by Eterdis (eterdis.com).

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 ECSS European space standards: the E-ST-10 system engineering family, the discipline standards a reader commonly mis-cites (radiation is E-ST-10-12, not a RAM standard; software is E-ST-40, not E-ST-70), the M-branch project management standards, the Q-branch product assurance standards, and the sustainability and system documents, with designation, edition, owner, status, and catalogue URL only. Contains no source content. Free process paths are existing NASA packs in this catalogue, named by slug, and are not ECSS clause substitutes. Several needs have no in-repo pack.

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。

Reconstructed reference notes on US FAA approval guidance for airborne software and airborne electronic hardware, built from four public-domain sources (FAA Order 8110.49A, AC 20-115D, AC 20-152A, AC 00-69; documents dated 2017-07-21 to 2022-10-07, pinned 2026-10-12). Use for how FAA certification staff plan and conduct software reviews (certification liaison, desk versus on-site review, review planning agreements), how the level of FAA involvement (LOI) is picked and scored with the Appendix A worksheets, how software conformity inspection works (software part and installation conformity, ASE and ASI tasks, Form 8120-10), what AC 20-115D recognizes and how DO-178B processes and tool qualification transition to DO-178C/DO-330 (supplements, FLS, UMS, legacy software changes), and what AC 20-152A adds for airborne electronic hardware (simple versus complex custom devices, robustness and HDL code coverage, tool assessment, previously developed hardware, COTS IP, COTS devices, circuit board assemblies), and what AC 00-69 adds as best practices for change impact analysis, data and control coupling, and design-level error handling (best practices, not guidance and not a means of compliance). SCOPE LIMITS: FAA guidance only, and guidance is not regulation (ACs are acceptable means, not the only means); no RTCA DO-178C or DO-254, EUROCAE ED-12C or ED-80, supplement, or SAE ARP text, which are copyrighted and named only (see the avionics-signpost pack); no AC 00-72 (named, not packed); no DO-178C software-level objective tables; no EASA AMC 20-115D or AMC 20-152A content (use easa-rules); reflects the pinned source dates, not later FAA actions; synthesized reference notes, not legal advice and not a substitute for the source documents. LICENCE: Public Domain (US Government work, 17 U.S.C. 105).

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 PRDs to prd.json format for the Ralph autonomous agent system. Use when you have an existing PRD and need to convert it to Ralph's JSON format. Triggers on: convert this prd, turn this into ralph format, create prd.json from this, ralph json.

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 Product Requirements Document (PRD) for a new feature. Use when planning a feature, starting a new project, or when asked to create a PRD. Triggers on: create a prd, write prd for, plan this feature, requirements for, spec out.

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 systems-engineering standards landscape — ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288, 24748, 29148, 42010, 15026, 24765; INCOSE SE Handbook & Vision 2035; OMG SysML; SAE/EIA 1001/649/748; ECSS space standards; NATO AAP-48; CMMI; NIST SP 800-160; and more. Contains NO source content: it lists each standard's designation, title, purpose, owning SDO, whether it's redistributable, and where to get it. Use when you need to identify or locate an SE standard — most are paywalled/all-rights-reserved and cannot be packaged, so this points you to the owner (and to the open packs where one 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。

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 OUSD(R&E) guidebook Implementing a MOSA in DoD Programs (Feb 2025). Use for the Modular Open Systems Approach as a DoD acquisition + design discipline: the statutory/regulatory basis (10 U.S.C. 4401–4403, FY2017/FY2021 NDAA, DFARS), the five OUSD(R&E) pillars, the plan→modularize→identify→define→standardize interface lifecycle, technical levers (WBS/MIL-STD-881F taxonomy, standards profiling, API-first software, COTS/cybersecurity), MOSA assessment metrics and tools (PART/OAAT/KOSS/SEAM/MAUT), technology-change and DMSMS management, roadmaps, MOSA across the six AAF pathways, and contracting/IP/data-rights mechanics. SCOPE LIMITS: this is U.S. DoD weapon-system acquisition policy, not a general open-architecture or interface-standards reference — it names standards (FACE, OMS, DISR) without reproducing them, is light on detailed engineering of any specific standard, and does not cover the underlying SE processes (use dau-se-guidebook / nasa-npr-7123) or general systems-engineering theory (use sebok).

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。

Psychoeducation on depression, anxiety disorders, PTSD, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, ADHD, and borderline personality disorder. Knowledge sharing without diagnosis.

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。

Ordner und Dateiablagen semantisch aufräumen: lokale Regeln und vorhandene Taxonomie erkennen, Dateien inhaltlich zuordnen, zusammengehörige Sets erhalten, klare Vorgänger-/Nachfolgerreihen und Logs archivieren, gemischte gültige und überholte Inhalte per Cut-and-Clue trennen und Löschkandidaten reversibel in einen Prüf-Papierkorb legen. Nutze diesen Skill bei „Ordner aufräumen“, „Dateien sinnvoll einsortieren“, „alte Versionen archivieren“, „Logdateien bereinigen“, „veraltete und gültige Inhalte trennen“ oder wenn beim Aufräumen Geheimnisdateien beziehungsweise Geheimnisse in einer Cloud-Ablage auffallen. Er funktioniert anbieter- und nutzerneutral allein; erkannte kompatible Module oder Dateidienste werden nur als optionale Beschleuniger genutzt. Für bereits vollständig definierte wiederkehrende Sammelregeln stattdessen eine regelbasierte Datei-Automation, für den Umbau einer ganzen Projektarchitektur einen Pipeline-/Projekt-Optimizer verwenden.

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。

Standard-Gerüst für rotierende Pipeline-Checks: Pro Lauf genau ein Ziel aus einer Menge (Projekte, Ordner, Repos) wählen — bevorzugt das am längsten ungeprüfte —, den Check durchführen, Ergebnis in einer Check-Registry und einem Verlaufslog festhalten. Nutze diesen Skill, wenn ein wiederkehrender Check über viele Projekte verteilt werden soll („prüfe regelmäßig alle X auf Y"), wenn eine Automatisierung Doppelprüfungen vermeiden muss, wenn eine Check-Registry/CHECKS-LOG-Struktur angelegt oder benutzt wird, oder wenn eine periodische Qualitätsrunde (Quellencheck, Style-Check, Health-Check, Audit) über eine Pipeline fair verteilt werden soll.

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。

Standard procedure for onboarding new software projects: Feature analysis, code quality review, onboarding checklist, and task creation.

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 a purchase order extract (spreadsheet, CSV or pasted table) and returns a DRAFT question sheet for the buyer: possible split orders, round amounts, amounts just under an approval threshold, first-seen or near-duplicate vendors, duplicate orders and missing or self approvals, each a neutral question naming the PO numbers, never a finding. Use when the user asks to "review these purchase orders", "screen the PO log", "spot anomalies in this spend extract", "sanity-check the PO register" or "prepare buyer questions before the audit". Do not use for an expense claim or travel request checked against policy, use expense-policy-precheck 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。

Produces a DRAFT 30-60-90 day onboarding plan for a new hire from the role, the team context and the systems list: phase outcomes traced to the role, activities with a named owner and due window, an access and equipment request table, learning items, manager checkpoints and the items the manager must confirm. Use when the user asks to "build an onboarding plan for our new hire", "draft the induction plan for this role", "write a first 90 days plan", "put together a new starter plan with owners", "create a ramp plan from this job description" or "plan the integration of an internal mover". Do not use for writing the job description itself, use job-description-drafter instead; for interview questions or a scorecard, use interview-scorecard-builder. 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 self-contained single-file HTML project dashboard (status banner, milestones table, risks heat list, decisions log, links) from the project tracker files the user attaches, pastes or holds in configured knowledge sources, and returns the complete HTML source in chat ready to save as dashboard-project-date.html. Use when the user asks to "build a dashboard for this project", "make a status page I can pin in the team channel", "give me an HTML overview of milestones, risks and decisions", "refresh the project dashboard from the tracker" or "turn these tracker files into a one-page visual summary". Do not use for creating or updating the tracker files or for the written weekly status report, use project-status-tracker 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。

Drafts an architecture or design decision record (ADR) from the discussion notes, design review minutes, chat threads and diagram descriptions the user provides: context, decision drivers, options considered with arguments as stated, the decision as the group worded it, consequences and a review date, with every factual claim tagged evidenced, asserted or UNKNOWN so unsupported claims are marked for the author to substantiate. Use when the user asks to "write an ADR", "document the architecture decision", "record why we chose this design", "turn these design review notes into a decision record" or "draft the design decision log entry". Do not use for a business or governance decision with no technical design, use decision-memo-builder instead; for the change ticket that implements the decision, use change-request-pack. 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 board paper skeleton from the sponsor's inputs: purpose, recommendation as the sponsor states it, options including do nothing, risks, financials exactly as provided, authority to decide and the decision sought, with every claim tagged evidenced, asserted or UNKNOWN so the sponsor sees what still needs support. Use when the user asks to "draft a board paper", "structure the committee paper", "prepare the decision paper for the investment committee", "skeleton the board memo" or "what goes in the paper for the audit committee". Do not use for a pre-read or briefing pack with no resolution sought, use executive-briefing-pack instead; to record a decision already taken in a discussion, use decision-memo-builder. 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。

Apply a scholarly 'nerd' visual style to single-file handwritten HTML document sites: publication-list look, restrained typography, no frameworks. Use when building or reviewing a lab site, a publications page or any new page that should match this house style. Triggers: /scholar-nerd-style, /nerd, nerd style, scholar style, build a page in our style, check page style.

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。

Onboard a NEW human peer ([коллега], [коллега], [коллега], future family/colleagues/clients) into building THEIR OWN Second Brain — the HUMAN layer that runs on… Trigger on “/brain-onboard“, “/brain-onboard <имя>“, “онбординг второго мозга“, “заведи <имени> второй мозг“, “onboard <name> into their second brain“, “личный волт для <имя>“, or when a peer's Claude receives the personal-vault-per-user rule

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 optimize their App Store listing for seasonal events, holidays, or trending moments — including keyword opportunities, metadata updates, screenshot theming, and timing strategy. Use when the user mentions "seasonal", "holiday", "Christmas", "New Year", "Valentine's Day", "summer", "back to school", "seasonal keywords", "trending now", "limited time", or wants to capitalize on a calendar event. For general keyword research, see keyword-research. For full metadata rewrites, see metadata-optimization.

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 optimize App Store metadata — title, subtitle, keyword field, or description. Also use when the user mentions "optimize my title", "ASO metadata", "keyword field", "character limits", "app description", or "write my subtitle". For keyword discovery, see keyword-research. For full ASO audits, see aso-audit.

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 analyze competitors' App Store strategy, find keyword gaps, or understand competitive positioning. Also use when the user mentions "competitor analysis", "competitive research", "keyword gap", "what are my competitors doing", or "compare my app to". For keyword-specific research, see keyword-research. For metadata writing, see metadata-optimization.

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。