「erd」の検索結果

Plant Unterricht, Lernangebote und individuelle Förderung ohne Berichtsgenerator oder persönliche Vorlagen.

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。

Regelmäßiger Pflegedurchlauf für ein bereits veröffentlichtes GitHub-Repository (Stufe 1, günstig und oft wiederholbar): zuerst alle Distributionsflächen des Projekts ermitteln (npm, PyPI, Registries, Marketplaces, Stores, Website) und Änderungen später dorthin spiegeln, dann Topics setzen, Privacy-Gate, Dokumente auf Veröffentlichungsabsicht prüfen und interne Planungsdateien nachträglich ignorieren, Banner ergänzen, Aussagen im README gegen den echten Code-Stand abgleichen, Darstellung verbessern, Sprachfassungen der README vervollständigen, Sichtbarkeitsmaßnahmen umsetzen, Eintrag auf der Organisationsseite prüfen sowie offene Issues und Pull Requests abarbeiten. Nutze diesen Skill, wenn ein bestehendes Repo gepflegt, aufgeräumt, aktualisiert, aufgehübscht oder "mal wieder durchgesehen" werden soll, wenn ein Repo veraltet oder unaufgeräumt wirkt, bei Formulierungen wie "Repo-Pflege", "after care", "Nachpflege", "Repo auf Stand bringen", "aufräumen und pushen" oder bei rotierenden Qualitätsrunden über mehrere Repos. Für die tiefe Runde inkl. Rechtscheck und orga-übergreifenden Querverweisen stattdessen full-after-care nutzen; für die Erstveröffentlichung github-repo-care.

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。

Teststrategie-Berater für Softwareprojekte — wählt die richtigen Teststufen (Unit/Integration/System/Abnahme), Testarten (funktional, nicht-funktional, änderungsbezogen) und Testentwurfsverfahren (Äquivalenzklassen, Grenzwerte, Entscheidungstabellen, explorativ) für die jeweilige Situation und SDLC-/CI-Phase, inkl. Testpyramide, CI/CD-Gates, Shift-Left und Best Practices. Nutze diesen Skill IMMER, wenn Tests geschrieben, geplant, priorisiert oder bewertet werden sollen — bei "schreibe Tests", "Teststrategie", "Testplan", "Testkonzept", "was/wie soll ich testen", "welche Tests fehlen", "Testabdeckung verbessern", "QA aufsetzen", Fragen zu Regression/Smoke/Sanity/Last/Stress/Security-Tests oder beim Einrichten einer Test-Pipeline — auch wenn "Test" nur beiläufig fällt. Abgrenzung — für die TDD-Schleife selbst superpowers:test-driven-development, für Bug-Diagnose bugfix-protocol, für systematische Bug-Suche bugsweep nutzen.

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。

Erfasst, ordnet und verdichtet bereitgestellte Notizen ohne Bindung an einen Speicherort oder eine Notiz-App.

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。

Meta-/Umbrella-Skill für die Familie „Projekt-/Pipeline-Aufbau & -Umbau". Kennt alle Skills für Anlegen, Aufnehmen, Umbauen und Analysieren von Projekten und Pipelines und leitet zum passenden weiter. Nutze diesen Skill, wenn unklar ist, ob etwas neu angelegt (Greenfield) oder umgebaut (Bestand) werden soll bzw. ob es um ein einzelnes Projekt oder eine ganze Pipeline geht. Auch auslösen bei „neues Projekt/Pipeline anlegen", „bestehendes umbauen", „Projekt aufnehmen", „Ordnerstruktur renovieren", „welcher Bootstrapper passt".

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。

Turns sustainability or ESG reports the user provides into a DRAFT question pack for reviewers: every quantitative disclosure as stated with unit, period, boundary and page, year-over-year changes computed only from the stated figures with the arithmetic shown, targets with stated and computed progress, restatements and inconsistencies, gaps and specific questions to the report owner. No assurance, accuracy or conformance verdict. Use when the user asks to "prepare review questions on our sustainability report", "what changed year on year in this ESG report", "check the figures in this report before it goes to the board", "find the gaps in this ESG disclosure" or "build a question pack for the report owner". Do not use for reviewing marketing text against environmental-claim rules, use green-claims-review 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。

Reviews a RAID log (risks, assumptions, issues, dependencies) line by line and returns a DRAFT review pack: which entries are stale, overdue, duplicated, ownerless, incomplete or misfiled, why, and a proposed update per line as current text against proposed text with the decision the project manager must take. Never re-rates, closes, merges or edits the log. Use when the user asks to "review the RAID log", "clean up the risk log", "health-check the RAID log before the steering meeting", "which risks are stale", "find duplicate risks" or "refresh the issue log". Do not use for setting up a new RAID log or logging a single new risk, issue or decision, 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。

Synthesises training survey responses and manager notes into a DRAFT training needs report by role: coded needs with record counts per role (n of N), the evidence type behind each count, anonymised quotes cited to record codes, disagreements between what staff report and what managers observe, gaps where a role is under-represented or a required skill has no evidence, and follow-up questions to settle before any course is designed. Never rates an individual, ranks a team or turns a count into a competence verdict. Use when the user asks to "analyse this training survey", "what training do our teams need", "summarise the manager feedback on skills gaps", "build a training needs analysis by role" or "which roles have the biggest skill gaps". Do not use for turning an agreed need into a course, use course-outline-builder instead; for exit interviews, use exit-interview-synthesis. 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。

Reviews one SKILL.md against the format rules and returns a findings table: strict YAML front matter with exactly name and description, name equal to the folder, description as the trigger, the eight-heading skeleton, capability-neutral wording, safety boundaries. Each finding carries severity, rule identifier, location, quoted evidence and replacement text; the verdict READY, REVISE or BLOCKED is an apparent state and the owner decides. Use when the user asks to "review this SKILL.md", "check my skill file before upload", "lint this skill description", "validate the front matter of this skill" or "score this skill folder". Do not use to write an agent's instructions field, use agent-instructions-drafter instead; for injection or leakage exposures use agent-instructions-red-team; for launch tests use agent-evaluation-plan. 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。

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Chief Business Officer archetype, covering commercial model, partnerships, deal structure, market positioning, strategic fit and opportunity cost, and returns a DRAFT review with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, commercial risks and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CBO review", "pressure-test this partnership", "check the deal structure" or "what would a commercial executive say about this". Do not use for pipeline, quota, sales-motion or forecast reviews, use cro-reviewer 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。

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Chief Information Security Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review with a verdict, findings cited to specific passages, security and compliance risks and the five interrogation questions a real CISO would ask. Use when the user asks to "run a CISO review", "pressure-test the security of this plan", "what would our CISO say about this" or "check the privacy and third-party risk". Do not use for contract, liability or regulatory-interpretation reviews, use general-counsel-reviewer 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。

Checks a master document register extract for gaps and returns a DRAFT question list for document control: missing or out-of-sequence revisions, overdue or slipping deliverables, numbering that breaks the project convention, duplicates and incomplete rows, each with row, test and quoted evidence. Never edits the register, re-baselines a date or marks a deliverable complete. Use when the user asks to "check the MDR", "find the gaps in the deliverables list" or "prepare questions on the drawing register". Do not use for drafting a transmittal from a document list, use transmittal-drafter 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。

Dual-layer PR review tool (Raven's Verdict). Runs adversarial cynical review and edge case hunter in parallel, merges and deduplicates findings into professional engineering output. Use when user asks to 'review a PR' and provides a PR url or id.

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。

Coach German writing and conversation with minimal corrections, persistent root-cause mistake tracking (FehlerDNA), mistake-based spaced repetition with a new sentence every time, roleplay whose words return in spaced reviews, continuing preparation for real-life goals across sessions, and an honest progress profile. Use for German correction, personalized review, vocabulary, progress, roleplay, or preparation for an interview, presentation, appointment, or other concrete event; do not use for translation-only requests without learning or feedback.

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。

Self-test both Telegram rails on this machine, the MCP connector and the userbot library, with a deterministic zero-token detector plus a real in-session MCP probe, and print a per-rail verdict with the exact fix for whichever is down. Triggers: "/tg-check", "are both tg rails up", "check telegram channels".

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。

Turn any hypothesis, however fringe, into an argument map rather than a verdict: five independent lenses (consensus, skeptic, frontier, historian, experimental design), then a synthesis of for and against, evidence quality, a confidence tier and the cheapest decisive experiment. Triggers: "/research-swarm <hypothesis>", "map the arguments on X".

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。

Review content quality before anything is shown or sent (vault notes, outgoing drafts, dedup merges, service files) and return an explicit pass, fail or manual-review verdict. The counterpart of a post-build test gate: that one asks whether the build works, this one whether the writing is fit to show. Triggers: "/taste-check <path|text>", "/taste", "check this note".

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 and collect promises: every promise, theirs to us and ours to them, goes into a registry with date and source, gets a reminder when due and is closed with evidence. Triggers: /promises, log this promise, who promised us what, what did we promise, overdue promises, promise tracker.

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。

Health-check the second brain so failures are not silent: is the local search server alive, is the RAG index fresh, is the session-memory ledger filling, did the nightly distillation run. Read-only, with a green/red verdict per component. Triggers: "/brain", "/memory", "is the reindex alive".

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-vendor code review: this agent reviews the other agent's diff and the other agent reviews this one's, so the final check always comes from a different model. Verdicts are APPROVE or REQUEST_CHANGES with file:line references. Triggers: "/codex-review", "cross-review this diff", "have the other vendor check this".

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 any open-source repository end to end and answer the core question — SHOULD YOU contribute to it? — with a GO / NO-GO / GO-IF verdict backed by evidence: snapshot, momentum, contribution landscape (PR acceptance rates, outside-contributor merge rates, first-timer outcomes), issue health, governance, community sentiment, and a final go/no-go recommendation. Use when the user asks 'should I contribute to X', wants a before-I-contribute due-diligence check on a project, asks whether a project accepts outside PRs, wants contribution-health numbers like PR merge rates or stale-PR counts, or asks for a deep dive on an open-source codebase's health and dynamics before investing time in it.

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。

Triage acc's open promises and close them with honest real-world verdicts via acc_act(runtime="outcome").

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 asks to "run the weekly social readout", "which denominator does our engagement rate use", or "which posts won this week and what changes next cycle"; produces the organic-social metric dictionary (every rate names its denominator — ERR engagement-by-reach vs ERI by-impressions vs ER-by-follower — locked across periods), median-not-mean per-post rollups with organic and boosted separated, EMV as labeled exec-translation only (never inside any score), an attributed CHAOSS/Orbit-style community-health readout with employees excluded, and the best/worst-performer write-back the next calendar cycle consumes. Not for dollar-ROI math or the ECHO profile result gate verdict — use roi-calculator and social-quality-auditor. 社媒周报/互动率分母/指标字典/复盘回写

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 asks to "find trending topics", "what trends should my brand jump on", or "time a campaign around a cultural moment"; produces a ranked trend report with brand-fit scores, format calls (rising/peak/declining), a cultural calendar, and go/skip recommendations. Not for finding the creators to run those trends — use influencer-discovery; not for building the brand posting calendar from a go verdict — use social-calendar-builder. 热点趋势洞察/借势营销

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。