「sat」の検索結果

Operate the Align-Anything multimodal alignment package, including training, serving, remote reward models, and satellite projects.

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。

Report how many problems the two brains found: mutual review (the other model checks the work, from the peer-review records) and self-check (an agent finds its own error in its own conversation, judged by that agent's own model), side by side. Use when the owner asks whether the second agent or the reviews are worth it, or wants the week's review results.

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。

Deeply research technical architecture, source code, mechanisms, SDKs, frameworks, project comparisons, and system-design options across repositories, history, official docs, issues, discussions, and high-quality community signals. Use when the user asks for deep research, source-level understanding, architecture comparison, mechanism satisfaction, or evidence for designing a system. Always map the question and obtain confirmation before beginning substantive research; skip for simple factual lookups or straightforward implementation tasks.

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。

This skill should be used when the user asks about "mystery", "fair play", "clue", "red herring", "romance beats", "HEA", "thriller", "ticking clock", "horror", "dread", "MG", "YA", "middle grade", "young adult", "science fiction", "sci-fi", "fantasy", "quest", "chosen one", "historical fiction", "period voice", "anachronism", "comedy", "humour", "humor", "romcom", "farce", "satire", "running gag", "serial", "episodic", "web serial", "genre conventions", or wants genre-specific structural craft for a story project. NOT for a clue check as a revision pass (use revision-continuity).

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。

Implements compliance with South Africa's Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA), Act No. 4 of 2013. Covers conditions for lawful processing, data subject rights, cross-border transfer restrictions, Information Regulator enforcement, and responsible party obligations. Keywords: POPIA, South Africa, Information Regulator, responsible party, operator, prior authorisation.

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。

Conducts pre-DPIA threshold screening to determine whether a full Data Protection Impact Assessment is required under GDPR Article 35. Applies the EDPB WP248rev.01 nine-criteria test, national supervisory authority blacklists, and organisational risk appetite to produce a documented screening decision. Keywords: threshold screening, DPIA trigger, pre-DPIA, WP248, Article 35(1), blacklist, screening decision.

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。

Assesses the GDPR Article 30(5) exemption for organisations under 250 employees. Covers the three exception conditions that negate the exemption: non-occasional processing, risk to data subject rights, and special category data processing. Activate for Art. 30(5), 250 employee exemption, small business RoPA, SME exemption, occasional processing.

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。

Guides DPIA for health and medical data processing covering Art. 9(2)(h)-(j) exemptions, HIPAA crosswalk for transatlantic operations, clinical trial data protection under EU CTR 536/2014, and genetic data specifics under Art. 9(1). Activate for healthcare systems, clinical research, health apps, or medical device data. Keywords: health data, DPIA, Art. 9, clinical trial, genetic data, HIPAA, medical records, special category.

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。

Guides building a multi-jurisdiction privacy compliance matrix for organisations operating across multiple countries. Covers common requirements identification, jurisdiction-specific deltas, gap analysis, and harmonised control frameworks. Keywords: multi-jurisdiction, compliance matrix, harmonised controls, gap analysis, jurisdiction mapping.

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。

Manages the absolute right to object to direct marketing under GDPR Article 21(2)-(3), covering immediate cessation of all direct marketing processing, suppression list management, cross-channel enforcement, and profiling for marketing purposes. Activate for marketing opt-out, unsubscribe, Art. 21(2), direct marketing objection queries.

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。

Nigeria Data Protection Regulation (NDPR) and Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA) 2023 compliance. Covers lawful basis for processing, data subject rights, cross-border transfer mechanisms, Data Protection Compliance Organisation (DPCO) registration, mandatory DPIA filing, and breach notification. Keywords: NDPR, NDPA, Nigeria, NITDA, DPCO, Africa data protection, cross-border transfer.

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。

Manages the organisational DPIA register tracking all Data Protection Impact Assessments across the enterprise. Covers DPIA lifecycle management, status tracking, review scheduling, Art. 35(11) periodic reassessment, and supervisory authority reporting. Implements a centralised register linking DPIAs to RoPA entries, risk registers, and mitigation plans. Keywords: DPIA register, DPIA tracking, Art. 35(11), review schedule, DPIA lifecycle, centralised register, DPIA portfolio management.

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。

Guides creation of organisational privacy policy hierarchy aligned to GDPR chapters including top-level policy, supporting procedures, operational guidelines, and training materials. Activate when building or updating policy frameworks. Keywords: policy framework, privacy policy, procedures, guidelines, policy hierarchy.

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。

Governs employee health data processing for fitness-for-work assessments, occupational health surveillance, COVID testing legacy programmes, and absence management. Applies Art. 9(2)(b) employment obligations and Art. 9(2)(h) health professional exceptions. Covers data minimisation, occupational health provider relationships, and return-to-work procedures. Keywords: health data, Art. 9, occupational health, fitness-for-work, special category, employment, sickness absence.

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。

Compares PIA/DPIA methodologies: CNIL PIA tool, ICO DPIA template, NIST Privacy Framework, and ISO 29134. Provides methodology selection criteria based on regulatory jurisdiction, organisation maturity, processing complexity, and resource availability. Covers regulatory acceptance, tool features, and cross-methodology mapping. Keywords: PIA methodology, CNIL, ICO, NIST Privacy Framework, ISO 29134, DPIA comparison, assessment.

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。

Implements BYOD privacy compliance frameworks for personal device use in the workplace. Covers personal vs corporate data separation, MDM capabilities and limitations, employee consent requirements, data wiping boundaries, and monitoring restrictions on personal devices. Keywords: BYOD, mobile device management, MDM, personal device, data separation, containerisation, remote wipe, employee privacy.

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。

Daily attendance register: check-in and check-out, hours worked, work mode, late minutes, leave and regularisation flags, as CSV, SQL, JSON Schema or Notion on request. Use for payroll input.

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。

Analyzes meeting transcripts and recordings to uncover behavioral patterns, communication insights, and actionable feedback. Identifies when you avoid conflict, use filler words, dominate conversations, or miss opportunities to listen. Perfect for professionals seeking to improve their communication and leadership skills.

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。

After you give a substantive answer or draft that the user may act on — advice or recommendations, drafted artifacts such as goals, plans, pitches, proposals, or emails, estimates or projections, analysis or interpretation of data, factual claims they may rely on, or a multi-step argument — invoke this skill BEFORE finalizing your reply and then, if it applies, append 2-3 short follow-up questions, each tied to something specific in what you just produced, that help the user check key facts, probe the reasoning or assumptions, and notice missing context. Do this at most once per conversation. Skip it when the user asked a trivial how-to or simple lookup, wants a purely educational explanation, asked you only to format, convert, or assemble a file from content they provided, is writing code they will run, is doing creative writing or casual chat, or already asked you to double-check, cite, or review — the skill file explains these boundaries and the exact output format.

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。

Interact with Slack — read channels, search messages, check unreads, send messages, manage reactions, and look up users. Use this skill whenever the user mentions Slack, wants to read Slack messages, check unread channels, search Slack conversations, send a Slack message, add reactions, or look up Slack users. Also trigger when the user pastes a Slack message URL, mentions a Slack channel (#channel), or asks about Slack notifications.

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。

Applies Han's shared Human-Readable Output Standard to a target you already have — a file on disk, text pasted into the prompt, or a draft already produced in the conversation — by dispatching the readability-editor to rewrite its prose so the main point comes first, headings are descriptive, each paragraph carries one idea, and sentences stay short and active, while preserving every fact. Use when you want to make a document or draft readable, edit or polish prose for readability, clean up writing, tighten wording, or re-apply the readability standard to something already written. Rewrites prose only, leaving code, diagrams, and citation identifiers unchanged. Does not write new feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not restructure code or review it — use refactor to restructure code and code-review to audit it. Does not judge the underlying work or raise findings; it only rewrites the writing.

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 feature implementation plan from an existing feature specification (or equivalent context) through a facilitated team conversation. Use when the user wants to plan how to implement, build, deliver, or ship a feature that has already been specified. Does not specify what the feature should do — use plan-a-feature first. Does not design the contract for an interface — use design-an-api. Does not refine or stress-test an already-written plan — use iterative-plan-review. Runs its resolution rounds to completion and holds its questions until after they finish; to review each round as it lands, use pairing.

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。

Walks a person through code changes one step at a time in conversation, starting at the entry point and following the flow that changes, showing a small chunk per step and explaining it in plain language. Defaults to the current branch's changes, and walks the code from the perspective of any context provided instead — a file, directory, symbol, pull request, plan, or ticket. Use when someone wants to be walked through, taught, paced through, or shown around code or a branch step by step, or to learn how a change works before reviewing or extending it. Stops after every step and waits, so the learner sets the pace. Paces through code that already exists and builds nothing — to build new work while being paced through it, use pairing. Does not produce a written overview to read alone — use code-overview. Does not review code quality — use code-review. Does not diagnose bugs — use investigate.

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 human-readable, progressive-disclosure overview of unfamiliar code or a pull request's changes — why it exists (the real problem it solves or goal it serves for the business or a user), and from there what it does, how it flows, and where to start — so you can get up to speed before working on or reviewing it. Use when you want to understand, get oriented in, make sense of, explain, or get up to speed on a chunk of code, a file, a directory, a symbol, or a PR's changes. Writes the overview to a scratch file and changes no code. Does not review code quality or raise findings — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting them. Does not produce durable feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not assess architecture or structural risk — use architectural-analysis. Does not diagnose bugs or root-cause failures — use investigate. Does not pace a person through the code one step at a time in conversation — use code-walkthrough.

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。