「struct」の検索結果

Bootstrap a new or existing project with a small, file-based documentation system so Claude Code keeps context, lessons, and decisions across session restarts instead of starting cold every time. Sets up a handful of markdown files under .claude/ (standing rules, a free-form note to your next session, a phased roadmap, a prioritized backlog, and searchable history/changelog archives) sized and split so the files read every session stay small while the archives grow without ever costing context. Use this whenever someone is starting a new project and asks how to structure it for long-running AI-assisted work, wants Claude to "remember" things between sessions without relying on chat history, asks for a CLAUDE.md + backlog + changelog setup, mentions "session continuity", "persistent context", "project memory system", or is retrofitting an existing codebase that has no such system yet. Also use to explain or extend an already-bootstrapped bottle system (add a rule, start the archival script, add a new backlog section).

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 designing, evaluating, documenting, modernizing, reviewing, refactoring, or implementing software architecture and code-level structure, including requirements, context, architecture style selection, microservices patterns, WebAssembly/WASI/Component Model, UMA portable capabilities, runtime contracts, capability graphs, governed MCP/agent orchestration, clean code, code smells, Rust crate/library API architecture, Cargo feature/MSRV/SemVer policy, unsafe/FFI/no_std/library testing, modularity, views, NFR tactics, IAM/auth, security patterns, cost estimation, architecture-as-code fitness functions, ADR/RFC work, and engineering execution plans.

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 uploads a screenshot of a hero section or landing page (or a URL/description of one) and wants a copy-paste-ready developer prompt to recreate it exactly in a tool like Lovable, Bolt, Replit, or Cursor. Produces prompts with exact hex colors, Tailwind classes, animation timing tuples, and component structure — not vague descriptions.

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 set of Rosetta Stone attribute mappings to a Narrative dataset by wrapping them in a one-shot workflow that calls the `CreateRosettaStoneMappingsIfNotExist` task. Consumes the structured output of `/generate-rosetta-stone-mappings`, normalizes the generator's snake_case to the workflow task's camelCase, re-validates every expression against the dataset's current schema, gates on user approval, submits via `narrative_workflows_create`, polls the triggered run, and reports per-mapping created / conflict / failed. Use when: "apply these mappings to dataset N", "create the Rosetta Stone mappings I just generated", "push the mappings I saved earlier to <dataset>", "productionize this mapping list", "submit the suggested_mappings array". (narrative-common)

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。

Translate a fuzzy analytical question into a rigorous investigation plan. Interrogates the ask, grounds the plan in the available data dictionary, applies analytical best practices, and produces a structured brief of query specifications for a downstream query-writing skill. Plans, does not write SQL. Use when: "why did X drop", "is there a relationship between A and B", "who are our highest-value customers", "what's driving the change in Y", "investigate this trend", "design an analysis for", "scope this analytical question". (narrative-common)

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 NRC software assurance guidance for digital computer software in nuclear power plant safety systems, built from seven public-domain sources (Regulatory Guide 1.168 Revision 2, July 2013; Regulatory Guides 1.169, 1.170, 1.171, 1.172, and 1.173 Revision 1, July 2013; NUREG-0800 Branch Technical Position 7-14 Revision 6, August 2016; pinned 2026-10-12). Use for software life cycle process questions, software requirements specifications, software configuration management plans, verification and validation with reviews and audits, test documentation and unit testing, and what NRC staff examine in a BTP 7-14 software review of plans, implementation, and design outputs. SCOPE LIMITS: NRC Regulatory Guides and the BTP 7-14 staff review position only; the endorsed IEEE standards (IEEE Std 603-1991, 7-4.3.2-2003, 828-2005, 829-2008, 830-1998, 1008-1987, 1012-2004, 1028-2008, 1074-2006), IEC 60880, IEC 61513, IEC 62138, and IAEA guides are cited by designation and edition only, with no standard text; RG 1.152 Rev 4, BTP 7-18, BTP 7-19, other SRP Chapter 7 sections, and NUREG/CR contractor reports are outside the pack; reflects the pinned 2013 and 2016 editions, not later agency actions; synthesized reference notes, not legal or licensing 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。

Knowledge pack synthesized from JSP 376 Defence Acquisition Safety Policy V1.1 (April 2024, Ministry of Defence, Open Government Licence v3.0): acquisition safety requirements, safety artefacts, and their application across the standard acquisition lifecycle. Covers the policy frame and legislative baseline, SRO and User responsibilities, safety management and safety requirements, test and evaluation and the safety case, supervision and approvals decision support, and the seven lifecycle phases. SCOPE LIMITS: single-source (JSP 376 V1.1); MOD policy and guidance, not statute; builds on JSP 815 and cites JSP 655, neither reproduced here (use jsp-815 for the SMS); Chapter 4 (Non-Standard Acquisition) is unpublished in V1.1 and is not in this pack; no DEF-STAN text (Def Stan 00-056 is named, not quoted); no other JSP reproduced. Reconstructed reference notes, not MOD guidance, and no official status.

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 EASA acceptable means of compliance for airborne software and airborne electronic hardware, built from AMC 20-115D (ED Decision 2017/020/R, AMC-20 Amendment 14, consolidated in Amendment 23) and AMC 20-152A (ED Decision 2020/010/R, AMC-20 Amendment 19, consolidated in Amendment 23), read from the Easy Access Rules AMC-20 compilation (Amendment 23, June 2023) and pinned 2026-09-26. Use for EASA software means of compliance, EASA AEH means of compliance, AltMoC, ETSO software, and the joint software and hardware certification workflow. SCOPE LIMITS: the two AMC sections only; no FAA content (use faa-8110-49); no RTCA DO-178C or DO-254, EUROCAE ED-12C or ED-80, or supplement clause text (use avionics-signpost to name them); no Part-21 body; no bulk AMC-20; AMC 20-193 and AMC 20-189 are name-only; reflects Amendment 23 as consolidated in the June 2023 EAR, not a later AMC-20 amendment; synthesized reference notes, not legal advice and not the official AMC. LICENCE: per-document (EASA site reproduction-with-acknowledgement grant, qualified by ED Decision all-rights-reserved footers); pack-level commercial use is not granted.

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。

Reconstructed reference notes on US FDA medical-device software regulation, built from seven public-domain FDA sources (the QMSR final rule 89 FR 7496, FDA device software guidance documents, and the eSTAR program page; pinned 2026-10-12). Use for regulatory pathways and premarket submissions (510(k), De Novo, PMA, eSTAR), premarket software documentation levels (Basic or Enhanced), software validation and Computer Software Assurance, the Quality Management System Regulation (QMSR, 21 CFR 820), medical-device cybersecurity (secure product development, SBOMs, FD&C Act section 524B, labelling), clinical decision support boundaries, off-the-shelf software, MDDS and other software-function scope questions, and the 510(k) software-change trigger. SCOPE LIMITS: US FDA device regulation only; no EU MDR or UKCA content (see `med-device-eu`); no ISO 13485, ISO 14971, or IEC 62304 text, which are named and summarized only as FDA obligations; no drug, biologic, or combination-product rules; reflects the pinned source dates, not later FDA actions; synthesized reference notes, not legal advice and not a substitute for the guidance 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。

Choose the design and the numbers a research run can honestly claim — write the structured METHOD RECORD (databases, date of access, search string, criteria, screening counts) that r0 validates, pick the claim strength a design can actually carry, record a statistic as data rather than prose, route to the reporting guideline the design owes, and decide what to preregister. Use when a run's question, design, search or statistics have to be settled before the writing, or when a claim needs a strength or a number attached to 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。

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。

Run a research project as a folder on disk — open the run root first, record the user's own instruction verbatim, open the two frame gates and stop for the human to answer them, and keep the stage the ledger says it is. Use when the user asks to start, resume or check a research run, a paper, a review, a brief, a report, a literature review or a protocol.

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。

Update TPP for engineer handoff when context is running low. Use when ending a session, running out of context, or switching to a different 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。

Work on a Technical Project Plan. Use when starting complex features, cross-platform changes, native module modifications, or multi-session work that needs persistent context.

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。

Iterative deep planning with critiques and alternatives. Use when facing complex design decisions, cross-platform changes, native module modifications, or API changes requiring thorough 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。

Review code for potential issues and improvements. Use when asked to review specific files, functions, or code sections.

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。

Update docs, playbooks, shims, generated docs, and alignment checks so public instructions route to the right canonical 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。

Load for cross-layer refactors, record/class or value-object migrations, new services/interfaces/repositories, project references, dependency-direction failures, or deciding whether code belongs in Domain, Application, Persistence/Infrastructure, API, or Blazor; not for a local edit wholly inside an established layer pattern.

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 the user asks for CTO advice on feature strategy, architecture direction, build-vs-buy, infrastructure, market positioning, roadmap, self-hosting, cost, or organizational tradeoffs; not for reviewing an existing implementation-plan workstream.

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 .NET observability changes involving structured logs/Loki, Prometheus metrics, OpenTelemetry traces, exception handling, correlation IDs, dashboards, alerts, or production error diagnosis; not for ordinary business validation errors.

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。

Advisory checkpoint for deciding whether planning-document edits should be split into a separate planning branch/PR. Use only when the user explicitly asks where to commit `memory/SPEC.md` or `memory/PLAN.md` changes, mentions planning-doc merge conflicts, asks for a planning PR, or instructs you to prepare/submit one. Do not trigger for ordinary ln-* planning edits, one-line status updates, or routine canonical reconciliation.

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 code quality focusing on deep modules, naming, model hygiene, and architectural clarity. Use after a burst of development, when codebase structure needs assessment, or to make code more agent-navigable.

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。

Capture volatile session state into a structured handoff document before context is lost. Use when ending a session, switching threads, approaching context limits, or at any juncture the user chooses.

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。