「general」の検索結果

Routes general Convex requests to the right project skill. Use when the user asks which Convex skill to use or gives an underspecified Convex app task.

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。

Routes general Convex requests to the right project skill. Use when the user asks which Convex skill to use or gives an underspecified Convex app task.

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。

Offensive/hostile QA auditor. Generalist reviewer specialized in the WordPress universe. Assumes everything is wrong until proven otherwise. Audit-tier only — produces severity-ranked findings, never implements.

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 or modify Rash Studio projects, SVG animation templates, timeline keyframes, interactive scenes, and website embeds. Use for Rash authoring requests, not general Flash or SWF conversion.

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。

TDD 오케스트레이터 — 대상 클래스(FQCN)의 템플릿 문서·테스트 클래스를 생성하고 tdd-plan→tdd-rgb 워크플로우를 안내. "TDD 시작", "TDD로 새 클래스 만들자", "테스트 주도로 시작", "/tdd" 요청 시 사용. 단, 템플릿이 이미 있는 상태에서 사이클만 돌리는 것은 /tdd-rgb, 요구사항 정리부터는 /tdd-plan-input이 적합. /tdd <general|web-app> <FQCN>으로 호출.

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。

Load for pre-PR self-review or pull-request review that must verify the matched intent, allowed scope, required tests/docs, forbidden actions, architecture gates, and merge readiness; not for a general code-quality diff review alone.

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。

Load when creating, scaffolding, configuring, debugging, testing, containerizing, or publishing a C#/.NET Model Context Protocol (MCP) server using the official Microsoft ModelContextProtocol SDK; not for non-.NET MCP servers, general ASP.NET Core APIs without MCP, or consuming external MCP tools as a client.

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。

Load when creating or editing a Slidev `slides.md` developer talk/workshop with Markdown slides, Vue components, live code, Mermaid/LaTeX, presenter notes, or Slidev PDF/PPTX export; not for native PowerPoint decks or general docs.

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。

Load when EF Core reads are slow, emit N+1 or excessive SQL, over-fetch, track too many entities, cause high DB load, or need projection/split-query/compiled-query analysis; not for general migrations, DbContext setup, or repository conventions.

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。

Econometrics skill for machine learning methods in causal inference. Activates when the user asks about: "causal forest", "generalized random forest", "GRF", "double machine learning", "DML", "debiased machine learning", "LASSO for variable selection", "post-LASSO", "heterogeneous treatment effects", "CATE", "conditional average treatment effect", "BLP analysis", "CLAN analysis", "causal tree", "honest estimation", "因果森林", "双重机器学习", "异质性处理效应", "条件平均处理效应", "LASSO变量选择", "机器学习因果推断", "去偏机器学习"

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 SD-22 DMSMS Guidebook (DSPO, FY24 working draft). Use for managing Diminished Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS) and obsolescence across a long-lived system's life cycle: the five-step process (Prepare, Identify, Assess, Analyze, Implement) plus the Strategize overlay; standing up a DMSMS Management Team (DMT) and Management Plan (DMP); risk-based monitoring and surveillance (the risk cube, predictive tools, vendor surveys, GIDEP/DLA PDNs, critical-materials analysis); health assessments and resolution timing; costing and selecting resolutions (life-of-need buys, substitutes, redesign, technology refreshment) by AoA/BCA; and budgeting/executing resolutions through modification funding and the ECP process. Defense-sustainment / DoD-acquisition framing throughout. Does NOT teach general systems engineering, parts-management standards, or contracting law in depth, and does not reproduce DoD policy text or the source's tables and figures.

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 EU Artificial Intelligence Act — Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. Use for AI system classification (high-risk vs prohibited vs general), conformity assessment procedures, GPAI model obligations, transparency and disclosure requirements, governance structure (AI Office / AI Board), penalty tiers, value-chain operator obligations, post-market monitoring, and Annex III use-case analysis. Does not cover EU liability rules for AI (separate proposed directive) or implementation guidance documents issued after July 2024.

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 AMS Lifecycle V&V Guidelines (verification and validation), Version 3.0, dated April 2017. Use for applying verification and validation across the FAA Acquisition Management System (AMS) lifecycle: the verify-vs-validate distinction (built right vs. right thing), the work-product/component/product tiers, the nine V&V planning elements, the four method catalogs (Appendix C), decision-point-gated V&V (SASP, CRD, Investment Analysis, Solution Implementation, In-Service Management), the Appendix B document checklists (PRD/APB/ISPD/PMP), and the DT/OT/IOA test triad. Scope limits: this is an FAA acquisition-V&V doctrine, NOT a general SE process model, requirements-engineering manual, or test-design textbook. It borrows its core V&V definitions from CMMI v1.2 (SEI, paraphrased) and presumes the surrounding AMS lifecycle (see the FAA SEM pack); its phase tables are policy snapshots as of April 2017 and it is thin on detailed test methods, tool specifics, and anything outside FAA acquisition governance.

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。

General Blender workflow skill for AI agents working with .blend, .fbx, .obj, .glb, glTF, materials, scene inspection, bpy automation, headless Blender batch runs, export/reimport validation, previews, and optional Blender MCP control. Use when a task asks to open, inspect, create, automate, convert, optimize, render, or verify Blender or 3D asset files in a user-agnostic way.

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。

Answers an employee's or manager's HR policy question strictly from the policy documents the user supplies or the agent can reach as knowledge: a DRAFT answer that quotes the governing clause with its document, version and clause reference, lists the conditions and exceptions the text states, returns UNKNOWN where the documents are silent and names the role to ask. Never invents a rule, fills a gap from general practice or decides an individual's case. Use when the user asks to check a policy, for example "what does the policy say about", "am I entitled to", "how many days of leave do I get", "what is the process for requesting", "does the handbook allow" or "which clause covers". Do not use for comparing two policy versions or briefing a change, use policy-change-briefing 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。

Turns an engineer's notes, a ticket history or a chat thread into a draft step-by-step runbook with preconditions, stop conditions, numbered steps with checks, verification, rollback and escalation, for the team to validate before use. Commands verbatim, placeholders marked, every gap UNKNOWN; never executes a step or fills a gap from general knowledge. Use when the user asks to "write a runbook from these notes", "turn this resolved ticket into a runbook", "document the steps we ran" or "check this runbook for gaps". Do not use for a business process without commands, use sop-drafter instead; for a knowledge article or known-error record, use knowledge-article-drafter; for the post-incident review, use incident-postmortem-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。

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。

Sweeps the last 24 hours of email, chat messages and meeting transcripts for commitments in both directions, what the user promised others and what others promised the user, reconciles them against a running commitments ledger (open, done, overdue), lists overdue items first and returns the updated ledger plus a proposed task list as Markdown for the user to save. Use when the user asks to "check my commitments", "what did I promise", "what am I owed", "did anything slip" or "run the commitment sweep". Do not use for a general morning summary of mail, calendar and mentions, use custom-daily-brief 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 vendor contract in character as a Head of Procurement archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage or clause, commercial risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "review this from a procurement angle", "what would procurement say about this proposal", "pressure-test this vendor contract commercially", "find the holes before the sourcing committee" or "check the renewal terms like a Head of Procurement would". Do not use for liability, IP, regulatory or signing-authority questions, use general-counsel-reviewer instead; for whether the spend fits the budget, use cfo-reviewer; for vendor security, use ciso-reviewer. 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 Data Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, data and AI governance risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CDO review", "pressure-test the data governance in this plan", "what would a CDO say about this", "check the metric definitions and data sources" or "prepare this for the data governance board". Do not use for security controls or third-party security risk, use ciso-reviewer instead; for contract, liability or regulatory terms, use general-counsel-reviewer. 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。

AI-first web search via Exa — semantic/neural ranking, category-scoped results, fresh content retrieval, and one-shot answer synthesis with citations. Use when the user needs current web information better ranked than general web search, or a grounded answer with sources.

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 full-paper Chinese-English side-by-side, figure/table-aware, source-grounded Markdown readers for journal or conference papers from PDF, DOI, arXiv, publisher HTML, or pasted text. Use whenever the user asks to translate or read a paper, make 中英文对照/原文对照/全文翻译解读, extract figures or tables into the right positions, preserve figure/table placement near relevant prose, or keep exact source anchors for every block. This skill must not degrade into a summary-only output unless the user explicitly asks for a summary. Also trigger on general paper-reading and translation requests even without the word "Nature", such as reading/translating an academic paper, literature reading, understanding a paper, and Chinese phrasings like 读论文、精读论文、论文翻译、文献翻译、文献阅读、学术阅读、帮我读这篇文章、翻译这篇paper.

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。

Simulate a Nature-style reviewer assessment from the referee perspective rather than an author rebuttal. Use when the user wants a pre-submission review, reviewer report, peer-review style critique, novelty/significance/technical soundness assessment, reviewer-style manuscript evaluation, 审稿人视角评估, 预审稿意见, or Nature reviewer report. Return 3 reviewer reports plus a cross-review synthesis, grounded only in the local Nature reviewer source basis. Also trigger on general pre-submission review requests during academic writing even without the word "Nature", such as getting a mock peer review for any journal, critiquing a draft as a reviewer would, assessing novelty/rigor before submission, and Chinese phrasings like 审稿人视角、模拟审稿、预审、帮我审一下论文、投稿前自审、审稿意见模拟、找论文问题.

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。

Submission-grade remote-sensing Nature/high-impact journal figure workflow for Python or R. Use whenever the user asks to create, revise, audit, or polish manuscript figures, multi-panel scientific plots, map-led composites, remote-sensing image plates, sensor/product workflow figures, validation/error/uncertainty panels, or journal-ready SVG/PDF/TIFF outputs, especially for Nature-family, Remote Sensing of Environment, ISPRS, IEEE TGRS, or other high-impact venues. Before plotting, define the figure's conclusion, evidence logic, export needs, and review risks. If the user has not chosen Python or R, ask "Python or R?" and stop. Use only the selected backend for figure generation, previewing, exporting, and QA. Supports matplotlib/seaborn and ggplot2/patchwork/ComplexHeatmap. Not for dashboards or Illustrator/Figma-first infographics. Also trigger on general academic-writing figure needs even without the word "Nature", such as making figures/plots for a paper, scientific/academic plotting, data visualization for a manuscript, and Chinese phrasings like 遥感论文配图、学术写作配图、科研绘图、科研作图、地图出图、论文图表、可视化.

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。