4,572 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Use when the user asks to create, write, update, amend, supersede, or evaluate an ADR, architecture decision record, durable architecture decision, decision log, or baseline sync after architecture-changing 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。
Faithfully append a human modeler's choice and rationale to one canonical per-subquestion JSONL decision ledger. Use after a choice card is answered or when migrating legacy decision artifacts; never originate or improve the 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。
Monthly, on the last weekday, file work only, no browser at all. Folds the decision ledger, scores this Employee's own judgement against the metric files that measured it rather than against its own predictions, appends one outcome line per closed decision, retires a move proposed three times and never accepted, and rewrites the priorities where the evidence disagrees with them. It refuses to publish a calibration figure on too few closed decisions, changes nothing outside its own folder, proposes nothing to anybody, sends only where you released the channel, spends only where you released it, and never touches a credential.
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 exercise directory structures with sections, problems, solutions, and explainers that pass linting. Use when user wants to scaffold exercises, create exercise stubs, or set up a new course 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。
Controls authorized cybersecurity exercises through inject scheduling, safety gates, stop and restart decisions, communications, and synthetic-data boundaries. Use when serving as exercise control or white-team coordinator, not as compliance assessor or whitehat operator.
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。
Offer 对比决策器。用户同时拿到两份（或多份）offer 纠结怎么选时，扮演 Senior Career Decision Advisor：结构化对比 comp / 成长 / AI 敞口 / 公司强度 / 团队风险 / 晋升速度 / 生活方式，识别 front-loaded vs long-term upside、resume value、switch-out 难度、hidden risks，最后给一条**明确、有立场、不中性**的推荐（并附「你是 X 类人选 A，你是 Y 类人选 B」的分叉判定）。三步：贴两份 offer → 补 priorities & 现状 → 自动生成并打开一份 HTML Offer Decision Report。是 offer-toolkit 里 JD Skill / Resume Skill / BQ Skill 拿到结果之后的下一环。关键词：offer compare, 选 offer, 两个 offer, offer decision, TC compare, 该去哪家, which offer, 4-year TC, RSU, sign-on, front-loaded, long-term upside, career 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。
Upload video/audio media to BytePlus VOD (Video on Demand) storage, returning the Vid and playback references; supports local file upload (ApplyUploadInfo + TOS + CommitUploadInfo) and URL pull upload (UploadMediaByUrl); also submits precision erasure jobs on ingested media (StartExecution / Operation.Task.Erase): Auto OCR only — default subtitle-only erasure, optional full on-screen text, optional EraseOption ClipFilter (skip/selected); NewVid is always true; optional WithEraseInfo. Trigger keywords: precision erasure, precise erase, VOD upload, subtitle removal, OCR subtitles, remove on-screen text, erase text, StartExecution Erase.
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 you need to generate Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) for a Java project through an interactive, conversational process that systematically gathers context, stakeholders, options, and outcomes to produce well-structured ADR documents. This should trigger for requests such as Generate ADR; Create Architecture Decision Record; Document architecture decision; Architecture Decision Record for Java. Part of Plinth 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。
Create exercise directory structures with sections, problems, solutions, and explainers that pass linting. Use when user wants to scaffold exercises, create exercise stubs, or set up a new course 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。
Addresses healthcare AI privacy at the intersection of HIPAA and the EU AI Act for clinical decision support systems. Covers training data PHI handling, model transparency and explainability, patient rights in algorithmic decisions, FDA/OCR regulatory coordination, and bias monitoring. Keywords: healthcare AI, HIPAA, AI Act, clinical decision support, PHI training data, model transparency.
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 a Data Protection Impact Assessment for automated decision-making and profiling systems under GDPR Article 35(3)(a), covering algorithmic transparency, meaningful human oversight, contestation mechanisms, and Art. 22 safeguards. Activate for DPIA automated decision, profiling DPIA, algorithmic impact assessment, Art. 35(3)(a), ADM risk assessment 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。
Designs and executes tabletop breach simulation exercises for testing organizational breach response capabilities. Covers scenario creation with realistic inject timelines, participant role assignment, communication testing across internal and external channels, decision-point evaluation, and after-action report generation. Keywords: tabletop exercise, breach simulation, incident response testing, scenario design, after-action report.
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。
Think and work like an expert Experimental Physicist. Use when a task calls for Experimental Physicist judgment. Reasons from GUM error budgets, traceable calibration chains, and multiplied signal-chain transfer functions — separating Type A and Type B uncertainty, null runs, and ELN-linked reproducibility before precision or discovery claims.
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。
Think and work like an expert Astrophysicist. Use when a task calls for Astrophysicist judgment. Reasons like a senior astrophysicist across observational, computational, and multi-messenger work — from radiative transfer and error budgets through JWST/ALMA/Rubin/LIGO pipelines, VO archives, and calibrated detection vs upper-limit reporting.
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 fast, local, typed decisions to any project with Laya, an open-source non-generative decision model (pip install laya). It classifies, routes, scores and answers yes/no questions about a piece of text, returning calibrated probabilities in roughly 20-35 ms on a laptop GPU, with no LLM call and no data leaving the machine. Use this skill whenever the user wants to classify or route text, triage tickets or emails, detect spam, phishing, toxicity or intent, put a guardrail in front of an agent or LLM, score something against a rubric, or replace an LLM-based classifier to cut latency or cost. Also use it when they mention Laya, Jev, a "System 1 model", "typed decisions" or a "decision model", even if they never name Laya.
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 exercise directory structures with sections, problems, solutions, and explainers that pass linting. Use when user wants to scaffold exercises, create exercise stubs, or set up a new course 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。
Determine technologies needed to build the product, making build/buy/integrate decisions during PRD v0.5 Red Team Review. Handles both greenfield and brownfield contexts. Triggers on requests to select tech stack, evaluate technologies, make build vs. buy decisions, discover existing assets, or when user asks "what technologies?", "select tech stack", "build or buy?", "what do we reuse?", "existing stack", "technical decisions", "what tools do we need?", "evaluate solutions". Consumes FEA- (features), SCR- (screens), RISK- (constraints). Outputs TECH- entries with decisions, rationale, and trade-offs. Feeds v0.6 Architecture 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。
This skill should be used when the user asks about "technical decision", "what to use", "A vs B", "comparison analysis", "library selection", "architecture decision", "which one to use", "tradeoffs", "tech selection", "implementation approach", or needs deep analysis for technical decisions. Provides systematic multi-source research and synthesized recommendations.
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。
Technical decision-making frameworks - trade-off evaluation, reversibility analysis, and second-order thinking for better engineering choicesUse when "should we, which is better, trade-off, decision, choose between, versus, pros and cons, what if we, is it worth, evaluate options, decisions, trade-offs, architecture, adr, reversibility, strategy, planning, risk" mentioned.
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。
Extracts and records architectural decisions from diffs, conversation context, and explicit choices. Supports automatic extraction from staged changes, deduplication against prior decisions, and persistent ADR-format logging with spec traceability. Use after a significant design or architecture choice, before committing a diff that embeds implicit decisions, or when the same question keeps resurfacing.
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。
Architecture Decision Framework workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Architectural decision-making framework. Requirements analysis, trade-off evaluation, ADR documentation. Use when making architecture decisions or analyzing system design and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing 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。
Architecture Decision Framework workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Architectural decision-making framework. Requirements analysis, trade-off evaluation, ADR documentation. Use when making architecture decisions or analyzing system design and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing 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。
B2B 大客户销售 (B2B 大客户销售 / 企业级复杂销售 (Enterprise B2B Sales / Complex Selling) — 面向企业客户的高价值、长周期、多干系人复杂销售的职业认知操作系统，从业者(AE/客户经理/SE 售前/销售负责人 VP Sales/CRO)、想入行者、以及服务这行(销售咨询/enablement/RevOps)的视角。覆盖: (a) 第一性张力 — 三大方法论流派之争: **买方主导的诊断式提问 (consultative/discovery-led: SPIN 提问 → 痛点 → 方案, 「像医生先诊断再开方」) ⇄ 卖方主导的教学式挑战 (Challenger: Teach-Tailor-Take control, 用商业洞见 reframe 客户认知, 「像老师挑战客户的既有想法」) ⇄ 资格审查纪律 (MEDDIC/MEDDPICC: 先严格 qualify/disqualify, 「no deal 好过 bad deal」)**; 三派不是非此即彼, 资深人混用, 但底层世界观分歧真实(问 vs 教 vs 筛); 更深层张力 — 「过程/方法论纪律 (process rigor: 预测准确、deal inspection、qualify) ⇄ 关系/信任 (relationship: champion 培养、高管关系、人情)」, 「卖结果/业务价值 (business outcome/ROI、卖给经济决策人) ⇄ 卖产品/功能 (feature selling)」, 「多线程触达买方委员会 (multithreading buying committee) ⇄ 单一 champion 依赖」; (b) 方法论正典 (最标准化、最易蒸出高质量+CLI 化) — MEDDIC/MEDDPICC (Metrics 量化指标/Economic buyer 经济决策人/Decision Criteria 决策标准/Decision Process 决策流程/Identify Pain 痛点/Champion 内部拥护者 + Paper process 签约流程/Competition 竞争), SPIN (Situation/Problem/Implication/Need-payoff 提问序列), Challenger (商业洞见 commercial insight + reframe + 建设性张力 constructive tension + Mobilizer 调动者), Solution Selling (痛点链 pain chain/愿景创建/buying vision), Sandler (前置合约 up-front contract/痛苦漏斗 pain funnel/潜艇七步), Command of the Message (Force Management: 业务价值框架/before-after/decision criteria), Gap Selling (Keenan: 现状 current state → 期望 future state → 差距 the gap/问题中心), Miller Heiman Strategic Selling (蓝表 blue sheet/buying influences: 经济/用户/技术买家 + coach), Value Selling, BANT (老式资格框架, 多被 MEDDIC 取代); (c) 行业结构与角色 — SDR/BDR (开发/约见) → AE/客户经理 (成交) → SE/售前/Solutions Engineer (技术验证/POC/demo) → CSM (客户成功/续约扩张) → Sales Manager/VP Sales/CRO; RevOps (收入运营), Sales Enablement (赋能); land and expand (先落地再扩张)、量化指标 quota/OTE(目标总收入)/配额达成率/pipeline coverage(管道覆盖率 ~3x 业内经验法则)/win rate(赢率)/sales velocity(销售速度)/ramp time(爬坡期)/ACV·ARR·NRR(年合同额/年经常性收入/净收入留存); (d) 销售周期 (the deal/opportunity lifecycle) — prospecting 开发 → discovery 需求挖掘 → qualification 资格审查(MEDDIC) → demo/technical validation/POC 技术验证 → business case/value 业务价值与 ROI → proposal 提案 → negotiation 谈判(procurement 采购/法务/security review) → close 成交 → onboarding/expansion 交付与扩张; 干系人: champion 拥护者 vs coach 线人 vs economic buyer 经济决策人 vs blocker 阻碍者; mutual action plan/close plan(双向行动计划/成交计划); (e) 产出物与节奏 — discovery call(需求电话)、demo、business case、proposal/SOW、MAP(mutual action plan)、forecast(预测: commit/best case/pipeline 类别)、pipeline review/deal review/QBR(季度业务回顾)/account plan(客户计划); (f) 职业/招聘/薪酬 — quota/OTE/comp plan(底薪+提成)/accelerator(加速器)/SPIFF/clawback、ramp、President's Club(顶尖销售俱乐部)、SDR→AE→管理 晋升路径、rep turnover(销售流失率高); (g) 争议/批判 — Challenger 是否过誉(CEB 原始数据被质疑、insight selling 批评)、MEDDIC 沦为填表剧场(box-checking theater, 填字段不真 qualify)、活动指标 vs 质量(spray-and-pray 群发/冷电话存废之争)、AI SDR/自动化淹没收件箱(2024-2025 AI BDR 泡沫 + 邮件送达率崩溃 backlash)、SDR 军团模式是否将死(Winning by Design/signal-based GTM 取代)、配额虚高与销售 burnout、季末打折促单、销售方法论的「宗教化」与培训-认证产业链、最大竞争对手其实是「no decision/维持现状」而非对手; (h) 流派/思想谱系 — 提问诊断派(Rackham SPIN/Bosworth&Eades Solution Selling/Keenan Gap Selling) vs 挑战教学派(Dixon&Adamson Challenger/Force Management Command of the Message) vs 资格纪律派(MEDDIC: Napoli&Dunkel 起源/John McMahon/MEDDICC Andy Whyte) vs 关系战略派(Miller Heiman Strategic/Large Account) vs SaaS 现代收入架构派(Aaron Ross Predictable Revenue/Mark Roberge Sales Acceleration Formula/Jacco van der Kooij Winning by Design bowtie/David Skok 指标) vs 开发-心态派(Jeb Blount Fanatical Prospecting/Sales EQ、Anthony Iannarino、Josh Braun) vs 谈判(Chris Voss Never Split the Difference 战术同理心)。不含: B2C/零售/电商导购销售、纯电话客服/客户支持、纯渠道/分销管理(channel 虽相关但聚焦直销复杂销售)、纯 marketing/需求生成(demand gen 虽上游但本 skill 聚焦销售执行)、纯 CSM 客户成功(虽相关但聚焦 new logo + expansion 的销售动作)。) Master OS — automated mastery of B2B 大客户销售 / 企业级复杂销售 (Enterprise B2B Sales / Complex Selling) — 面向企业客户的高价值、长周期、多干系人复杂销售的职业认知操作系统，从业者(AE/客户经理/SE 售前/销售负责人 VP Sales/CRO)、想入行者、以及服务这行(销售咨询/enablement/RevOps)的视角。覆盖: (a) 第一性张力 — 三大方法论流派之争: **买方主导的诊断式提问 (consultative/discovery-led: SPIN 提问 → 痛点 → 方案, 「像医生先诊断再开方」) ⇄ 卖方主导的教学式挑战 (Challenger: Teach-Tailor-Take control, 用商业洞见 reframe 客户认知, 「像老师挑战客户的既有想法」) ⇄
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 a product-manager copilot that turns evidence into product decisions and artifacts: backlogs and prioritization, PRDs and user stories, metrics and OKRs, experiments, launch plans, feedback triage, and pricing/packaging, kept in a per-product workspace. Use whenever the user wants to decide what to build, spec it, or ship it: "write a PRD for…", "prioritize our backlog", "what should we build next", "plan OKRs", "define our north star metric", "design an A/B test", "plan the launch", "triage this customer feedback", "platform or feature?", in any language ("viết PRD", "ưu tiên tính năng nào", "quản lý sản phẩm", "プロダクト管理", "产品经理"), even when they never say "product manager". Also use when the user returns to a product workspace this skill created (a directory holding `product.md`, `state.md`, and `decisions.md`). Not for deep user discovery (design-thinking), desk market facts (market-researcher), or company-level bets (strategy-board).