1.3万 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Use when designing, implementing, reviewing, debugging, testing, profiling, or porting concurrent, parallel, distributed, high-performance, network dataplane, kernel-bypass, or real-time software, including locks, semaphores, monitors, MPI, CSP rendezvous, DPDK, VPP, eBPF, XDP, AF_XDP, SR-IOV, RSS, RoCEv2/RDMA, RMS/EDF, priority inversion, and environment selection from silicon to edge.
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。
Create, verify, transfer, and resume compact project handoff packets for long-running Codex work. Use after a second observed automatic context compaction, immediately after a third compaction, when attention or constraints degrade, a major phase ends, the user asks to move work into a fresh task, work must pause, or an existing handoff needs to be imported. Do not interrupt after the first normal compaction. Always ask before creating a new task, transfer the global roadmap only after explicit consent, preserve the old task title when available, then require the fresh task to ask what work matters most. Preserve objectives, constraints, decisions, evidence, approval boundaries, workspace state, validation, and risks without treating an old summary as current truth.
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。
調査結果や分析レポートを4層構造（エグゼクティブサマリー→概要→詳細→Appendix）で整理し、意思決定者向けに構造化する。レポート作成、既存ドキュメントの再構成、経営層向け報告書の作成に使用する。Do NOT use for ナレッジベースへの情報保存（knowledge-baseを使用すること）。
End-of-life detection for runtimes (Node, Python, Java, Go, .NET) and key packages — surfaces past-EOL items, items reaching EOL within 90 days, and EOL base images for containers. Use when planning a runtime upgrade, auditing for unsupported versions, gating a deploy against EOL deps, or producing a remediation roadmap.
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。
Terraform / OpenTofu / Nix / k8s manifest misconfiguration detection — open security groups, missing encryption, public S3/GCS, IAM wildcards, plaintext secrets, missing tags. Use when reviewing an IaC PR, gating `terraform apply` / `tofu apply`, auditing existing state for drift, or building a compliance report for cloud configuration.
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。
Compare standardized metrics across multiple ego-benchmark-harness runs by recalculating them from tasks.jsonl and session JSONL, never from HTML reports. Covers overall aggregates (success rate/average score), Odysseys per-rubric pass rates, duration distributions (avg/p50/p90/max), turns/tools/cost, error and exception counts, per-task success matrices, helper distributions, and the share of DOM operations. Use whenever users ask to compare data or metrics across runs, calculate aggregate/Odysseys/duration/turn/error/helper metrics, inspect differences among runs, or compare multiple rwb/real-world-bench runs. Use pi-session-analyzer instead for deep forensic analysis of why an individual task was slow or failed.
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。
Generate self-contained HTML/CSS benchmark and comparison charts in an ego-inspired Browser-Native Editorial style. Use for blue-white product metrics, model benchmarks, A/B comparisons, efficiency reports, difficulty breakdowns, and compact technical data panels.
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 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。
Signpost (not a knowledge pack) for maritime safety and class rules: SOLAS Consolidated Edition 2024 (IH110E) as the paywalled statutory core, ISM Code & Guidelines 2018 (ID117E), ISPS Code 2003 (K116E) and the 2021 guide (IB116E), and COLREGS 2026 (IC904E), with designation, edition, owner, status, and official URL only. Contains no source content. Free-path layers are US flag implementation (eCFR Title 46 and USCG circulars), the USCG Navigation Rules PDF, UK MCA notices under Open Government Licence v3.0, and class portals (DNV, ABS, Bureau Veritas). None of those layers is the IMO consolidated text. No in-repo pack covers these instruments.
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。
Work the review of a research run with rs_review — read the manuscript and record the panel's concerns with the evidence that grounds each one, keep the author's reply and the re-review's finding in their separate columns, run the devil's advocate with the concession threshold the tool enforces, and write the panel report and traceability matrix a response-to-reviewers letter is built from. Use when a document is ready for review, when a concern has to be answered or re-reviewed, or when an attack or a concession is being recorded.
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。
Get literature into a research run when the plugin fetches nothing — fetch the source yourself with web_fetch / web_search or take a file the person already has, READ it with the pdf_* tools or ocr, then ingest record and text together with rs_cite, bind locators, and cite with [@key]. Use when a run needs sources, when a library export has to come in, when a citation key is unknown, or when a claim cannot be checked against a source.
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。
Publish or refresh one or a few free-AI-credit offers from screenshots or text — official sources win, unverifiable offers dropped, validates, diffs, commits on approval. Don't use for catalog-wide re-checks, scraping, or bulk imports.
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。
Re-verify active offers vs official sources, fix drifted terms, refresh evidence, then issue, PR, review, merge unattended; report-only/no-merge modes. Use for daily checks or stale-content issues. Don't use for adding or editing one offer, or CI.
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。
Refactor code to remove dead code, useless comments, unused variables, and unused imports. Use when asked to declutter a class, clean up noisy code, remove cruft, or run `/refactor:declutter`.
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。
Acceptance-test newly added features using browser automation, happy-path flows, screenshots, UX notes, and a written report. Use when asked to test a feature, verify a recent UI change, or check whether an app workflow works.
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。
Two-phase code quality skill: (1) review codebase for structural smells — file LOC, method LOC, accidental complexity, test readability — producing a structured report, then (2) fix all smells via provable refactorings with ACN micro commits and green-bar-at-all-times discipline. Use this skill when the user says 'sweep', 'code review', 'find code smells', 'check method lengths', 'review for complexity', 'tidy up the codebase', 'refactor smells', or asks about long methods, test readability, or accidental complexity. Also trigger when users ask to 'clean up' or 'improve code quality' across multiple files.
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。
Compile deep repository evidence into artifact-bound correctness doctrine — authority/law/proof maps, owned invariants, failure archaeology, and the strongest durable destination for each piece of knowledge, plus an optional minimal repository-specific skill portfolio. Use when the user wants both deep codebase understanding AND durable doctrine, knowledge routing, or repo-specific skill recommendations. Research discoverable facts before asking. Read-only. Not for quick onboarding, one isolated invariant, ordinary implementation, generic review, or direct skill creation.
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。
Perform comprehensive exploratory testing on a website using browser automation, covering user journeys, forms, errors, accessibility, responsiveness, performance, and security basics. Use when asked to QA a site, explore an app, find bugs, or produce a browser testing 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。