962 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Use when the rule set is over the Augment budget, when a new rule would breach it, or when asked to audit / merge / prune rules — runs the audit pipeline and proposes a verdict per 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。
Use when creating or editing a rule in src/rules/ — trigger wording, always vs auto classification, size budget — even when the user just says 'add a rule for 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。
Use when optimizing AGENTS.md or copilot-instructions.md — deduplicates against .augment/ content, enforces line budgets, and focuses each file on its audience.
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。
[Content] Use when you need to build marketing strategy: positioning, channels, messaging, campaigns, budget, KPIs.
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 Quality] Use to validate a spec artifact's decisions with the user across three contexts — a freshly-authored Feature Spec (idea-to-spec), an existing canonical spec before PBI decomposition (spec-to-pbi), or a refined idea + §8 test-specs (idea-to-pbi deep mode). Detects the context, walks every applicable validation category, and runs an exhaustive but budget-bounded blocking clarification gate so every non-obvious or conflicting decision is confirmed before the artifact drives downstream work.
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 writing, moving, reviewing, or auditing documentation in the deepseek-harness repo — choosing hierarchy and detail, separating tutorials from references, checking tutorial progression, trimming doc slop, responding to a verify-doc-budgets failure, or requests like "improve the docs", "audit the docs", "where should this be documented", or "this doc is too long".
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。
How to MEASURE this repo instead of eyeballing it — interpret the loop-station context-budget trend (history.jsonl, thresholds, the tokenizer-switch gotcha), read a session trace, use the eval ledger (cost-per-success), and pick the right evidence tool (app-shots, smoke-deployed, db-counts, --check modes). Use when asked "is the harness bloating", "how big is CLAUDE.md really", "did this agent run actually succeed", "prove this works", "what evidence do we have", or when tempted to declare a capability (browser, tool) unavailable. For RUNNING the loop-station scripts, defer to the loop-station skill — this skill is interpretation + the wider evidence toolkit.
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。
Strategy cascade based on Roger Martin and A.G. Lafley's Playing to Win framework. Five interconnected choices that define a real strategy — not a vision statement, not a list of priorities, not a strategic plan that's really just a budget with adjectives. Runs in three modes — Diagnostic for building or rebuilding the full cascade, Review for pressure-testing an existing one, and Alert Triggers for defining the tripwires that tell you the cascade is breaking. Updates company-context.md after every run. Triggers on questions about strategy, strategic choices, winning aspiration, where to play, how to win, competitive strategy, or when someone says "we need a strategy" and means it. 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。
Recommend Azure VM sizes, VM Scale Sets (VMSS), and configurations based on workload requirements, performance needs, and budget constraints. No Azure account required — uses public documentation and the Azure Retail Prices API. WHEN: recommend VM size, which VM should I use, choose Azure VM, VM ...
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。
Add x402 payment execution to AI agents — per-task budgets, spending controls, and non-custodial wallets via MCP tools. Use when agents need to pay for APIs, services, or other agents.
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。
6 production-ready AI engineering workflows: prompt evaluation (8-dimension scoring), context budget planning, RAG pipeline design, agent security audit (65-point checklist), eval harness building, and product sense coaching.
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 domain folder of skills into a bounded agentic loop: compile a goal into a verifiable task plan, execute tasks with the domain's own tools, verify every task with machine-run checks, retry with caps, escalate to a human when budgets exhaust.
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。
Maintain a support docs pack — dedup, length budgets, and no splintering — and land changes as a reviewed pull request. Use when a support thread, or a hand-off from Support assist, surfaces a new resolution, a correction to an existing one, or a deployment quirk worth recording. Not for ordinary code changes.
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 advising, planning, reviewing, reporting, operating, or improving CTO and technology leadership work across strategy, cybersecurity management, SME/COE, functional and technical requirements, framework selection, people, organization, delivery, risk, KPI, roadmap, budgeting, governance, audit, R&D, stakeholder communication, culture, politics, and sector-specific leadership.
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 NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods (NIST HB 151) — the practical statistics reference for engineering, metrology, and quality. Use for: exploratory data analysis and the four univariate assumptions (4-plot); measurement process characterization including bias/precision, calibration designs, gauge R&R, and ISO/GUM uncertainty budgets; production process characterization (stability vs. capability); process modeling and regression (LS/WLS/NLS/LOESS); design of experiments (screening, fractional/factorial, response-surface, Taguchi); statistical process control (Shewhart/CUSUM/EWMA charts, capability indices, acceptance sampling); product/process comparisons (hypothesis tests and confidence intervals for 1/2/3+ groups, ANOVA, multiple comparisons); and reliability (lifetime & repair-rate models, accelerated testing, reliability growth). Scope limits: this is applied frequentist statistics for measurement and quality — it does NOT reproduce the per-distribution formula galleries, worked case studies, datasets, plot images, or Dataplot/R code of the original web Handbook (those are described, not copied); it is thin on modern machine learning, Bayesian methods beyond conjugate reliability priors, time-series/forecasting, and Bayesian experimental design.
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 OMB Circular A-94 (revised 2023-11-09) on guidelines and discount rates for benefit-cost and cost-effectiveness analysis of federal programs. Use for BCA principles, benefit/cost measurement, discount-rate policy, uncertainty/sensitivity, distributional incidence, and decision reporting. Rescoped at build to A-94 only (Army CBA Guide unreachable). Does not replace A-11 budget preparation detail, agency-specific statutory BCA rules, or Army CEAC process templates.
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。
Role-based multi-model strategy. The model catalog lives in a local configuration file instead of the skill text -- roles (thinker/decision-maker, long-running worker, draft generator, reviewer/acceptance, escalation), reasoning effort as an independent axis, mandatory review for draft models, provider switching for independent reviews, budgets, delegation flow, and cost/quality of small workers.
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。
Wählt vor komplexer Multi-Agent-Arbeit gemeinsam mit dem Nutzer eine passende, begrenzte Orchestrierung und erzeugt einen kompakten Session-Vertrag. Nutze den Skill bei /choose-your-orchestrator, bei unsicherer Kombination aus Orchestrator, Schwarm, Modellrouting oder Nutzerpräferenzmodell sowie vor Agentenprogrammen, die Modellslots, Parallelität, Spawn-Tiefe, Schreibgrenzen, Abnahme und Eskalation ausdrücklich festlegen müssen.
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。
Autonomer Langlauf-Modus ohne laufende Rückfragen — Startbedingungen (Ziel, Scope, Budgets, Checkpoints), Entscheidungsstufen und Abbruchregeln für unbeaufsichtigte Läufe; erhöht die Ausdauer, nicht die Berechtigung. Nutzen, wenn ausdrücklich ein längerer autonomer Lauf gewünscht ist.
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 schedule extract (milestone list or planning tool export) and the period's status notes into a DRAFT plain-language slip explanation: which milestones and activities slipped and by how many working days, arithmetic shown, why per the notes as verbatim fragments with source and date, what each slip pushes next per the extract, and the decision each slip needs framed as a question with the options the notes propose and the owner the governance documents name, every missing fact marked UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "explain the schedule slip", "what slipped this month and why", "write the schedule commentary for the steering pack", "put the delay in plain language for the sponsor" or "what decisions do these slips need". Do not use for the weekly status report, use project-status-tracker instead; for cost variances, use budget-variance-explainer; for one sprint's carry-over, use sprint-review-summary. 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 deal's notes and timeline (CRM opportunity record, activity log, emails, meeting notes, forecast entries) for risk signals such as a single contact thread, no identified budget owner, slipped or missing dates, silence after a proposal, an undefined decision process or a competitor named late, and returns a DRAFT risk register: each signal with the quoted evidence and its date, a severity on a stated scale, and one proposed next action with an owner role for the user to decide on. Use when the user asks to "review the risks on this deal", "why is this opportunity stalling", "is this deal single-threaded", "deal health check before the forecast call" or "what should we do next on <opportunity>". Do not use for a whole-account plan, use account-plan-builder instead; for scoring early leads against a rubric use lead-qualification-scorer. 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。
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。