「cis」の検索結果

MBSR fundamentals, body scan, and breathing exercises. Evidence-based mindfulness techniques according to Jon Kabat-Zinn for everyday life.

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。

Stabilization techniques: Grounding, safe place, containment, and breathing exercises. Immediate techniques for acute distress and panic attacks.

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。

Produces a DRAFT product requirements document from the discovery notes, interview summaries, support themes, analytics notes and stakeholder messages the user provides: problem statement, target users, goals with measures as stated, numbered requirements each with a testable acceptance criterion, non-goals, constraints, dependencies and open questions, with every statement tagged evidenced, assumed or UNKNOWN so each assumption is visible for the product owner to confirm. Use when the user asks to "write a PRD", "draft the product requirements", "turn these discovery notes into requirements", "document what this feature needs to do" or "build the requirements doc for this epic". Do not use for supplier-facing requirements in a tender, use rfp-requirements-pack instead; for a technical design decision, use architecture-decision-record; for the change ticket that ships the work, use change-request-pack. 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。

Maintains four living project files (overview and progress log, decision log, RAID log, links) from the mail, channel posts, documents and meeting notes the user attaches or the agent can reach, returns each touched file complete in the chat for the user to save, and builds a weekly DRAFT status report from those files. Use when the user asks to "set up tracking for project X", "catch the project files up", "log this decision against the project", "add this risk to the RAID log", "save this link to the project" or "write this week's status report". Do not use for reviewing an existing RAID log for stale or ownerless entries, use raid-log-review instead; for an HTML status page, use project-dashboard-builder; for minutes of one meeting, use meeting-minutes-writer. 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 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 employee software request (tool, purpose, users, data handled, cost, urgency) against the approved-tools list and the policies the user provides and returns a draft review for the reviewer: match state on the list with the row quoted, approved tools the list itself describes as covering the same need, policy clauses that bear on the request with quoted text, questions for the requester and the reviewer, and one suggested decision with its basis. Never approves, procures, installs or adds a tool to the list. Use when the user asks to "review this software request", "is this tool on the approved list", "check this request against our software policy", "do we already have something approved that does this" or "prepare the decision note for this tool request". Do not use for a full vendor security assessment, use vendor-risk-screening-brief instead; for sorting mixed requests, use request-intake-triage. 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 one meeting transcript, recording recap or set of raw notes into concise DRAFT minutes returned in the chat as a single Markdown document: header metadata, attendance and apologies, agenda items each with a short neutral summary and outcome, numbered decisions with an owner, numbered action items with owner and due date, open questions, carried-over actions and the next-meeting line, every entry backed by a short verbatim source fragment and every missing fact marked UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "write the minutes", "draft minutes from this transcript", "turn these notes into meeting minutes", "produce the minutes of meeting for today's call", "tidy my rough minutes into the standard format" or "prepare the minutes for circulation". Do not use for extracting action items, task lists or per-owner follow-up emails alone, use transcript-to-actions 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 access export (accounts, entitlements, grant and last-used dates per system) into a draft access review pack, one section per system owner: who has what, since when, anomalies to confirm and the decision each line needs, with a blank column for the owner's decision. Never decides, revokes or rates access. Use when the user asks to "prepare the access review pack", "split this entitlement export by system owner", "who has access to what in this system", "build the recertification pack from this export" or "draft the access attestation for the owners". Do not use for a single request for a tool or access, use software-request-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。

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。

Capture decisions and commitments after a meeting and draft a concise follow-up.

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。

Decision protocol for strategic work: recall the knowledge vault, run a gap analysis, emit a deep-research prompt for external tools, then synthesize the returned reports into a decision memo. Use before any new product, feature, market, pricing, GTM or architecture call, where local recall alone is not enough. Triggers: "/alfa-search-recall-deepresearch", "alpha protocol", "R+DR".

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。

Designs and reviews the internal architecture of a WordPress plugin — folder layout, PSR-4 one-class-per-file discipline, Schema/Constants placement, composition-root vs singleton decisions, conditional asset enqueueing, script config via wp_add_inline_script, and prefixed custom-hook naming. Use when scaffolding includes/src, reviewing class organization, asset enqueue code, repeated strings, or "should I make this a singleton" decisions.

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。

Design and interpret TypeSafe Jev decision requests in NV oOS — typed choice/score/noul questions, batching, confidence thresholds, composite scoring, and guardrails. Use when classifying, routing, scoring, or safety-screening content with the typesafe_decide or typesafe_guardrail tools.

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。

Architectural decision-making framework. Requirements analysis, trade-off evaluation, ADR documentation. Use when making architecture decisions or analyzing system 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。

Stress-test a marketing decision using multiple expert lenses and synthesize disagreements into a clear decision with evidence and risks.

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。

When the user wants to apply psychological principles, mental models, or behavioral science to marketing. Also use when the user mentions 'psychology,' 'mental models,' 'cognitive bias,' 'persuasion,' 'behavioral science,' 'why people buy,' 'decision-making,' 'consumer behavior,' 'anchoring,' 'social proof,' 'scarcity,' 'loss aversion,' 'framing,' or 'nudge.' Use this whenever someone wants to understand or leverage how people think and make decisions in a marketing context. For applying psychology to specific pages, see cro; for pricing tactics, see pricing; for copy framing, see copywriting.

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。

Sales enablement, technical presales and deal acceleration for B2B SaaS revenue teams. Use this skill when planning outbound campaigns, running discovery calls, building deal strategy, creating battle cards, writing proposals, responding to RFPs, preparing a product demo, scoping a proof of concept or pilot, answering a security questionnaire, executing sales sequences, or coaching qualification. Also triggers on: outbound, cold outreach, deal strategy, pipeline, battle card, proposal, RFP, discovery call, MEDDPICC, sales sequence, qualification, sales engineer, solutions engineer, presales, demo plan, demo script, POC, proof of concept, pilot success criteria, technical evaluation, technical win, security questionnaire, vendor security review, SOC 2 questionnaire, technical objection, mutual action plan, MAP, close plan, mutual close plan, buyer enablement, the deal is stalled, deal stalled after the demo, how do I get this deal to close, close date keeps slipping, JOLT, buyer indecision, no-decision loss.

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。

Get a second opinion or independent review from Codex (OpenAI) via the local Codex CLI. Use when the user wants Codex to review a design memo, PR, diff, or decision, or to cross-check an approach from another model. Also trigger on "Codexに聞いて", "Codexと相談", "Codexにレビュー", "Codexの意見", "別のモデルで確認".

AGENTS.md などの恒久ドキュメントに一過性のタスクログが混入していないか、SOP / decision / log / learned の役割が混同されていないか、公開物（README / docs / 記事）に内部メモ・ローカルパス・AI 会話断片が残っていないかを差分で検出する

Keep a reviewable decision trail for long-running or unattended work: a TSV log with one row per decision (what, why, evidence, result). Local by default; commit it when a reviewer needs the trail to trust the result. Use for /show-me-your-work, autonomous or multi-phase runs, or work a human reviews after stepping away.

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。

Expert-level guidance for Flutter production applications: architecture decisions (Clean/Layered/Hexagonal/Feature-First), advanced state management (BLoC/Riverpod/GetX), performance optimization (eliminating jank, memory profiling, reducing rebuild overhead), code review with design pattern enforcement, scalability assessments, native platform integration (MethodChannel/EventChannel/FFI), complex UI challenges (custom render objects, slivers), testing strategies (unit/widget/integration/golden), CI/CD pipeline architecture, build optimization, and accessibility compliance. Triggers: 'architecture decision', 'design pattern', 'performance issue', 'code review', 'production problem', 'scaling concerns', 'best practices', 'technical debt', 'refactoring strategy'. Essential for complex enterprise apps, critical production debugging, architectural refactors, or when choosing between competing technical approaches.

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。

Architectural decision-making framework. Requirements analysis, trade-off evaluation, ADR documentation. Use when making architecture decisions or analyzing system 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。

Act as FriendlyBet's CEO and primary front door for every FriendlyBet request through automatic company preflight. Own end-to-end routing, planning, execution coordination, department orchestration, decision-rights enforcement, quality gates, board-style reporting, and escalation only for strategic, legal, brand, cost, risk, or taste decisions. Use by default in FriendlyBet threads, with full department planning for broad, ambiguous, strategic, cross-functional, or outcome-driven requests such as SEO, new features, multi-sport expansion, product direction, release execution, company operations, or agent coordination.

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。