1.3万 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Unified verification: build→lint→test→type-check→coverage. Use for 'is everything green', 'run all checks', 'verify build'. Auto-called by mk:cook. NOT for lint/format only (see mk:lint-and-validate); NOT for test-to-requirement coverage mapping (see mk:nyquist).
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。
[Code Intelligence] Use when you need to build, update, or sync the code review knowledge graph. Flag: --scope={full|update|sync} (default auto-detect); --scope=full forces a full rebuild, --scope=update re-parses uncommitted working-tree changes, --scope=sync syncs committed git changes then updates the working tree.
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。
Recreate the nuxt-crouton dev environment from scratch and survive its install/build traps — the pnpm toolchain, the cold-start sequence (why packages must build before apps prepare), the version catalog and workaround pins, the per-app typecheck rule, required env vars, and the known environment traps. Use when setting up a fresh clone/worktree, when "pnpm install" or "nuxt prepare" fails, when an app won't boot after install, when typecheck output looks insane, or when a tool "isn't available". Trigger phrases: "set up the repo from scratch", "why does typecheck show thousands of errors", "playwright install fails", "what pnpm/node version". (Exact error strings — "Could not load '@fyit/crouton'", "Cannot find module '@vue/compiler-sfc'" — route via crouton-diagnostics-index first; it points back here for 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。
新しいWebアプリを要件整理から設計・実装・Cloudflare公開・品質確認まで一貫して構築する。Codexで「アプリを作って」「業務ツールを新規開発」「$build-app」と依頼されたときに使用する。
Wardley Mapping for strategic positioning — map your value chain from customer need to underlying components, plot where each component sits on the evolution curve (novel to commodity), and spot the strategic plays that movement creates. Use this skill when someone wants to understand where their industry is heading, whether they're building things they should be buying, where competitors are vulnerable, what's about to become commoditised, or why their competitive advantage is eroding. Triggers on questions about build-vs-buy, component evolution, value chain analysis, commoditisation risk, or strategic positioning relative to market movement. Three modes — full diagnostic (build a map from scratch), review (update positions and reassess), and alert triggers (set tripwires for when components move). 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。
Builds a structured vulnerability scanning workflow using tools like Nessus, Qualys, and OpenVAS to discover, prioritize, and track remediation of security vulnerabilities across infrastructure. Use when SOC teams need to establish recurring vulnerability assessment processes, integrate scan results with SIEM alerting, and build remediation tracking dashboards.
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。
Building a Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) involves deploying and integrating multiple CTI tools into a unified system for collecting, analyzing, enriching, and disseminating threat intelligence. T
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。
Build and release pipeline for the Pump SDK — tsup TypeScript builds, Cargo release profiles, semantic release with commitizen, npm publishing, linting, Makefile targets, Vercel deployment, and MCP server distribution.
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。
Build, start, and drive the Nuxt Theme Builder in a real browser (Playwright) to verify a change end to end — editor interactions, iframe preview sync, persistence across reloads, source view. Use when asked to run/start/screenshot the app or to prove a UI or persistence change works beyond unit 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。
Vite build tool configuration, plugin API, SSR, and Vite 8 Rolldown migration. Use when working with Vite projects, vite.config.ts, Vite plugins, or building libraries/SSR apps with Vite.
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。
Correlate events across multiple log files from different sources, systems, or time periods. Build unified timelines, identify causal relationships between events, and highlight anomalies that span multiple data sources. Supports timezone normalization and gap detection. Use when analyzing logs from multiple systems (frontend, backend, database, infrastructure), investigating distributed system failures, or building event timelines across services. Triggers: "correlate these logs", "build timeline from multiple logs", "cross-system analysis", "find related events across logs", "multi-source log analysis", "distributed trace analysis"
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 a dataset or access rule before it joins an identity-graph build (access rules behave like datasets in NQL here). Enumerates failure modes (hub identifiers, high-degree nodes, suspicious values, over-connected identifiers), tests hypotheses in parallel, quantifies damage by rows / edges / entities, and proposes minimal filters ranked by severity. When issues are found, returns a validated `CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW` NQL the caller can run to produce a graph-ready clean source; if the data passes, says so and recommends it unchanged. Plans and authors the clean-view NQL; does not execute it. Use when: "audit this dataset before the graph build", "find bad edges in <source>", "check identity data quality", "recommend filters for the graph build", "quantify damage from <identifier_type>", "pre-graph DQ". (narrative-identity)
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 the document of a research run — plan the question and the outline with rs_plan, write prose and declare its claims together with rs_write, choose the claim strength the evidence actually holds, follow the section structure the run's kind maps to, read the draft back, and build a watermarked draft before the gated clean build. Use when a run's document has to be written, a section drafted, a claim bound to a source, or a build attempted.
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。
Build, archive, export, upload, and manage Xcode version/build numbers with the current asc xcode helpers before App Store Connect upload or submission. Use when creating an IPA or PKG for upload.
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。
Structured 6-step procedure for improving, renovating, or rebuilding existing pipelines, individual project folders, documentation structures, or software stacks. Addressable as "pipeline optimizer" (for whole topic pipelines, e.g. a software, research, or game-dev pipeline) or "project-folder optimizer" (for individual project folders within a pipeline, e.g. a single software tool or paper project). Triggers on tasks like "improve pipeline X", "optimize the stack", "rebuild Y", "renovation", "pipeline refactoring", "clean up project folder", "improve folder structure", "unify conventions", "documentation consolidation", "integrate into existing system", or any substantial intervention in established structures. Delivers building-stock analysis, purpose clarification, ideal sketch, gap plan, empirical pain-point identification, and retests with fresh subagents. Prevents parallel standards, duplication, and pipeline breaks.
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 DRAFT user personas from the research notes, interview summaries, survey free text and support themes the user provides: for each persona the goals, pains, jobs to be done, context of use, quotes exactly as supplied with their participant codes, and the evidence count behind every attribute, with names, demographics and any detail no participant stated left UNKNOWN rather than invented. Use when the user asks to "build personas from these interviews", "who are our users based on this research", "draft user personas", "turn these research notes into personas" or "update our personas with the new interviews". Do not use for theming a batch of customer feedback into counts, use customer-feedback-theme-synthesis instead; for exit interviews, use exit-interview-synthesis; for the requirements those personas imply, use product-requirements-draft. 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。
Turns a campaign idea, its objectives and the supporting notes (audience material, offer facts, budget and dates, channel list) into one DRAFT one-page campaign brief: objectives, audience, one single-minded message with sourced proof points, channels and timeline, success measures with baselines, mandatories, risks and numbered open questions for the campaign owner. Use when the user asks to "write a campaign brief", "draft a creative brief for this launch", "turn this idea into a one-page brief", "tighten this brief to one page" or "build the marketing brief from these notes". Do not use for a message house, messaging pillars or a launch narrative on its own, use message-house-builder instead; for laying the campaign onto dated slots, use content-calendar-planner. 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 change-communication plan from a change description: audience map, key messages per audience traced to the description, channels, sequence with dates or day offsets, owners, feedback loop and open questions, plus drafts of the first messages for the sponsor to approve. Use when the user asks to "plan the comms for this change", "who needs to hear about this and when", "draft the announcement sequence", "build a communication plan for the rollout", "write the first message to managers about this change" or "how do we tell people about this". Do not use for a clause-by-clause comparison of a changed HR policy with its previous version, use policy-change-briefing instead; for a new hire's first weeks, use onboarding-plan-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。
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 DRAFT content calendar for a stated period from the themes, channels, cadence rules, fixed dates and owners the user provides: one dated row per planned item with theme, channel, format, working title, owner, status and source, plus a cadence check with its arithmetic, theme balance, owner load and the slots left open. Use when the user asks to "build the content calendar for Q4", "lay these themes onto dates", "plan a month of posts across our channels", "extend the editorial calendar" or "check this calendar against our cadence". Do not use for deciding what the campaign says or why it runs, use campaign-brief-builder instead; for writing the items themselves, use announcement-drafter or internal-newsletter-drafter. 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 data dictionary from a schema export, table definition, sample rows or a partial existing dictionary: one row per field with the name as stated, type as stated or observed, meaning quoted from the documentation supplied, owner, allowed values, and UNKNOWN wherever no source defines the field, plus a gap list for the data owner. Never infers a definition from a column name. Use when the user asks to "build a data dictionary for this table", "document these columns", "what does each field mean", "turn this schema export into a dictionary" or "fill in the field definitions from these documents". Do not use for profiling values or finding patterns in the data, use dataset-insight-pack instead; for metric definitions, use kpi-definition-sheet; for logging data defects, use data-quality-issue-log. 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。
Builds a DRAFT interface register between disciplines or parties from meeting notes, action lists and drawings or document lists: one row per interface with the requesting and providing party, the information needed, the related document number, the need-by date with its source, the status as minuted and a quoted source, plus UNKNOWN and questions where the notes are silent. Never sets a date, rates priority, assigns ownership beyond what the notes state or closes an interface. Use when the user asks to "build an interface register from these minutes", "list the interfaces between piping and civil", "who owes what to whom on this package", "update the interface register from this week's meeting" or "turn these action items into an interface list". Do not use for recording a design or document change raised in a meeting, use management-of-change-intake 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。
GraphDB構築エージェント - ユビキタス言語とコード解析結果からRyuGraphデータベースを構築。/build-graph [対象パス] で呼び出し。