1,368 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Queries Azure Monitor activity logs and sign-in logs via azure-monitor-query to detect suspicious administrative operations, impossible travel, privilege escalation, and resource modifications. Builds KQL queries for threat hunting in Azure environments. Use when investigating suspicious Azure tenant activity or building cloud SIEM detections.
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。
Prepare a defense-contractor environment for CMMC Level 2 certification: scope CUI and FCI, implement the 110 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 2 security requirements across 14 families, compute the SPRS score with the DoD Assessment Methodology, manage a compliant POA&M, and ready the organization for a C3PAO assessment. Use when an organization handles Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) under a DoD contract, when a contract carries DFARS clause 252.204-7012/7019/7020/7021, when preparing for or responding to a CMMC assessment, when computing or improving an SPRS score, when building a System Security Plan or POA&M for 800-171, or when scoping which systems are in the CUI boundary. Keywords: CMMC, CMMC Level 2, NIST 800-171, SP 800-171 Rev 2, CUI, FCI, SPRS, DFARS 7012, C3PAO, POA&M, System Security Plan, DoD Assessment Methodology, 110 controls, defense industrial base, DIB, FedRAMP equivalency.
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。
PCI DSS 4.0.1 compliance audit support skill. Provides expert guidance for Cardholder Data Environment (CDE) scoping, gap analysis, audit preparation, SAQ completion support, and remediation planning. Includes SOC 2 mapping for combined audit efficiency. Use when preparing for PCI DSS audits, conducting gap analysis, creating remediation plans, or answering SAQ questionnaires for payment card compliance.
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 creating bug/defect reports during system testing. Use this skill when you discover a bug, need to document test failures, or want to create comprehensive bug tickets with proper reproduction steps, severity assessment, and environment details. Guides users through interactive questioning to gather all necessary information and generates professional bug ticket documents in Markdown format. Supports Japanese (default) and English.
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, 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。
Create a free remote development host on Oracle Cloud (Always Free) end to end — install and authenticate the OCI CLI, provision VCN/subnet/NSG/instance with capacity retries, then apply a hardened Ubuntu 22.04 Ansible stack (Tailscale-only SSH, ufw, fail2ban, mosh, persistent tmux, Caddy tailnet web previews, on-host verification suite) and tear it down again. Use when the user says "free remote dev environment", "Oracle Cloud free tier dev box", "OCI Always Free VPS", "give me a cloud dev machine for free", "provision a dev host on Oracle", or asks to move a Tailscale-only dev host setup to Oracle Cloud. Covers OCI CLI bootstrap, the Tailscale cutover, verification, costs, and teardown.
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 invoking the standalone `event-setup` machine CLI to inspect the environment catalogue, validate or render dotenv input, process configuration manifests or tenant packages, export/import operator-identity portability artifacts, validate legal drafts, or run setup diagnostics; do not use for the interactive terminal UI, browser setup, or API endpoint 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。
Knowledge base from NASA-STD-8719.14C (Process for Limiting Orbital Debris). Use for orbital-debris assessment planning, mission-related debris limits, explosion/passivation and collision risk, postmission disposal options, reentry casualty risk, and ODAR/EOMP governance. Covers STD-8719.14C (Approved 2021-11-05) synthesized notes only; does not replace NPR 8715.6 delivery timing, NASA-HDBK-8719.14 environment/modeling depth, or program-specific OSMA waivers.
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 base from MIL-HDBK-338B (Electronic Reliability Design Handbook). Use for electronic reliability engineering: R/M/A theory, reliability specification/allocation/prediction, parts management and derating, reliable circuit and fault-tolerant design, environmental and human performance reliability, FMEA/FMECA/FTA/sneak circuit analysis, design reviews and testability, FRACAS, reliability demonstration and growth testing, and systems-level R&M parameters. Covers selected Part 2 design-guidance topics only; skips large annex/part-stress tables. Guidance handbook — not a contractual requirement text. Does not replace MIL-HDBK-217 prediction libraries, service-specific reliability regs, or safety standards (see mil-std-882).
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 base from the FAA Systems Engineering Manual (SEM) v1.0.1. Use for civil-agency systems engineering as the FAA practices it inside the Acquisition Management System (AMS) and the National Airspace System (NAS): the five-phase AMS lifecycle and its decision points; operational concept development and implementation-free functional analysis (ConOps, FFBD/N², CMLs); requirements analysis and architectural design synthesis (PRS→MRS, the PRD ratchet pPRD→iPRD→fPRD, RAM, ISEF/DoDAF views, CPRs); the seven technical management disciplines (Integrated Technical Management/SEMP, Interface Management/IRD-ICD, Risk-Issue-Opportunity, Configuration Management, SE Information Management, Decision Analysis, Verification & Validation); and the specialty disciplines (RMA via Service Threads/STLSC, Life Cycle Engineering, E3/Spectrum, Human Factors, Information Security via the NIST RMF, System Safety via the SMS, and Hazardous Materials/Environmental/EOSH). Scope limits: this is FAA-specific guidance, not policy — it is a tailorable menu that points outward to companion handbooks (FAA-HDBK-006A for RMA, the SMS Manual, the NIST 800-series) rather than restating generic SE theory; it is thin on detailed cost estimating, contracting/FAR law, software-development methodology, named anti-pattern catalogues, and any non-FAA or non-civil-aviation lifecycle. Source has no page numbers in the extracted text (~360 pp.).
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 base from the FAA Requirements Engineering Management Handbook (DOT/FAA/AR-08/32). Use for writing requirements for real-time, embedded control systems — the avionics/medical slant — via the Handbook's eleven recommended practices: system overview and boundary (monitored/controlled variables), operational concepts (use cases), environmental assumptions, change-tolerant functional architecture (dependency diagrams), safety-driven architecture revision (FHA/PSSA/fault tree), system modes, detailed behavior and performance requirements (ideal value + tolerance + latency), the four-variable model bridge to software requirements (MON/CON/NAT/REQ, IN'/REQ'/OUT', DO-178B mapping), subsystem allocation, and rationale. Carries the Isolette Thermostat and Flight Control System worked examples. Slanted toward control systems with sensors and actuators; thin on information-system / enterprise / agile requirements, on requirements-management tooling, and on the formal-methods internals of SCR/RSML/SpecTRM (it names them, does not re-teach them). Does not reproduce the IEEE/DO-178B/ARP standards it cites.
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 base from the DoD Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) Deskbook (Version 2022, OSD ManTech / Joint Service–Industry MRL Working Group). Use for assessing and managing manufacturing maturity and producibility risk in defense acquisition: the 10-level MRL scale and its non-linear, target-not-grade nature; the five demonstration environments (laboratory → production-relevant → production-representative → pilot line → production line); the nine manufacturing-risk threads and sub-threads; how MRL targets map onto Adaptive Acquisition Framework milestones (MRL 4/6/7/8/9); conducting an MRL Assessment; building a Manufacturing Maturation Plan; putting MRL maturity into contract language (Section L/M, SOW, AS6500A, DIDs); tailoring criteria for S&T, single-system, ship, sustainment, and industry contexts; and screening operational-technology cybersecurity. Manufacturing-readiness focused — it measures producibility risk and frames mitigation; it is NOT a technology-readiness (TRL) guide, a full systems-engineering process model, a cost-estimating or schedule guide, or a deep cybersecurity audit method (see sibling packs for those).
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 base from the GAO Agile Assessment Guide (GAO-24-105506, 2023). Use for assessing and managing Agile software development in federal programs: the Agile Manifesto and framework family (Scrum, Kanban, XP, SAFe, DA, DSDM, Lean, DevOps); the three adoption perspectives (team dynamics, program operations, organization environment); requirements decomposition (epics, features, user stories, INVEST, MoSCoW, definition of done); Agile-aware federal contracting (FAR, modular contracting, SOO/PWS/SOW, product owner vs. COR); program monitoring and control (WBS, cost, schedule, EVM at the feature level); Agile metrics (velocity, lead/cycle time, CFD, burn charts); and the auditor's key-question bank. Oversight- and acquisition-oriented: it tells you how to *assess and govern* Agile programs, not how to code. Thin on hands-on engineering practice, deep cost/schedule checklists (see gao-cost, gao-schedule), and any non-US-federal 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。
Knowledge base from the DoD Digital Engineering Strategy (2018, OUSD/ODASD(SE)). Use for the Department of Defense's five digital engineering goals — (1) formalize the development, integration, and use of models; (2) provide an enduring authoritative source of truth; (3) incorporate technological innovation; (4) establish supporting infrastructure and environments; (5) transform the culture and workforce — plus their focus areas, the document-to-model and design-build-test→model-analyze-build shifts, model formalisms/provenance, governance and access control of the authoritative source of truth, and the coordinate→plan→pilot→sustain rollout. A vision-and-policy strategy, deliberately non-prescriptive. Does NOT provide a how-to method, tool tutorials, MBSE/SysML mechanics, or implementation-plan content; thin on metrics, acquisition-policy detail, and step-by-step procedure. Excludes the CAC-gated Digital Engineering Body of Knowledge (DEBoK).
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 base from the FAA Human Factors Design Standard (HF-STD-001B, 2016) — the FAA's consolidated human-factors / human-systems-integration design criteria for systems it manages, operates, or maintains. Use for requirement-level design rules on: general human-factors design principles; automation and function allocation; designing equipment for maintenance; displays, controls, and visual indicators; alarms, audio, and voice communications; the computer-human interface (information presentation, coding, interaction styles, windows, dialogue); keyboards, input devices, and workstation/workplace ergonomics; system security, personnel safety, environment, anthropometry, and user documentation; plus intended-use and tailoring guidance. It is a quantified, source-attributed synthesis (heavily citing MIL-STD-1472G, MIL-HDBK-759C, DOD-HFDG-ATCCS, NUREG-0700, NASA-STD-3000, ANSI, OSHA, ISO 9241). Complements nasa-hsi as a parallel HSI tradition from the civil-aviation domain. Scope limits: it is design criteria, NOT an HSI lifecycle/process model (use nasa-hsi, nasa-npr-7123, or dau-se-guidebook for process); it does NOT reproduce the third-party standards it cites; it is FAA-acquisition-oriented (ATC, towers, TRACONs, airway facilities), not a general consumer-UX guide; and it is thin on modern touchscreen/mobile, web, and AI-driven interface patterns and on quantitative human-reliability 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。
Knowledge base from NASA-STD-8729.1A — NASA's R&M (Reliability and Maintainability) standard covering spaceflight and support systems (Revision A, 2017-06-13). Use for NASA's objectives-driven R&M framework — the R&M objectives hierarchy (one Top Objective decomposed into four sub-objectives, paired with tailorable strategies), how R&M requirements are established inside the SMA Plan required by NPR 7120.5, the SMA Technical Authority concurrence/independent-evaluation governance, milestone vs. readiness review gates, the reliability/maintainability/availability vocabulary (Ai vs. Ao, the failure causal chain, risk as a triplet), and the R&M Evidentiary Methods catalogue (FMEA/FMECA, FTA, RBDA, RCM, LORA, plus the space-environment and parts-pedigree analyses). Scoped to NASA spaceflight and support systems and to assurance planning: it is an objectives-and-strategies standard, so it deliberately does NOT prescribe step-by-step analysis procedures (those live in the referenced NASA Preferred Reliability Practices) and is thin on facility R&M, detailed math/derivations, and non-NASA or commercial life cycles.
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 sustainability or ESG reports the user provides into a DRAFT question pack for reviewers: every quantitative disclosure as stated with unit, period, boundary and page, year-over-year changes computed only from the stated figures with the arithmetic shown, targets with stated and computed progress, restatements and inconsistencies, gaps and specific questions to the report owner. No assurance, accuracy or conformance verdict. Use when the user asks to "prepare review questions on our sustainability report", "what changed year on year in this ESG report", "check the figures in this report before it goes to the board", "find the gaps in this ESG disclosure" or "build a question pack for the report owner". Do not use for reviewing marketing text against environmental-claim rules, use green-claims-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。
Drafts one knowledge article or known-error article from a resolved incident or ticket thread: symptoms as reported, environment, cause exactly as the resolver stated it, resolution steps as performed, workaround with its limits, verification, things tried without effect, related records, keywords and proposed metadata, every statement traced to a ticket note or marked UNKNOWN, with a redaction log and a question list for the knowledge owner. Never decides a root cause, adds a step or publishes. Use when the user asks to "write a KB article from this ticket", "turn this resolved incident into a knowledge article", "draft a known error record for this", "document the fix we just did" or "make this thread into a how-to for the service desk". Do not use for a procedure the team will execute (runbook, operating procedure, playbook), use runbook-drafter instead; for a post-incident review, use incident-postmortem-drafter. 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。
The SuperCollider language itself - function blocks and argument syntax, UGen rate methods (.ar/.kr/.ir), multi-channel expansion, var scoping, ~environment variables, the class library's shape, and the error messages that mean a specific mistake. Written for an agent that knows audio DSP but not this language.
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。
Derive or update the auto mode `autoMode.environment` block from the event corpus — which repos, hosts, buckets, and CLIs your work actually touches.
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。
Manage Railway projects, services, deployments, environments, variables, and deployment logs via Railway's public GraphQL API — one endpoint, relay-style pagination, two token flavors (account vs project), typed mutations for deploys and env vars. Use when the user wants to deploy, check service status, manage env vars, or read deployment logs programmatically without the Railway MCP installed.
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。
Manage Vercel deployments, projects, environment variables, domains, DNS, and build/runtime logs via REST API. Use when the user wants to deploy, check a deploy status, rotate env vars, attach custom domains, or investigate failed builds without the Vercel MCP installed.
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。
Submission-grade remote-sensing Nature/high-impact journal figure workflow for Python or R. Use whenever the user asks to create, revise, audit, or polish manuscript figures, multi-panel scientific plots, map-led composites, remote-sensing image plates, sensor/product workflow figures, validation/error/uncertainty panels, or journal-ready SVG/PDF/TIFF outputs, especially for Nature-family, Remote Sensing of Environment, ISPRS, IEEE TGRS, or other high-impact venues. Before plotting, define the figure's conclusion, evidence logic, export needs, and review risks. If the user has not chosen Python or R, ask "Python or R?" and stop. Use only the selected backend for figure generation, previewing, exporting, and QA. Supports matplotlib/seaborn and ggplot2/patchwork/ComplexHeatmap. Not for dashboards or Illustrator/Figma-first infographics. Also trigger on general academic-writing figure needs even without the word "Nature", such as making figures/plots for a paper, scientific/academic plotting, data visualization for a manuscript, and Chinese phrasings like 遥感论文配图、学术写作配图、科研绘图、科研作图、地图出图、论文图表、可视化.
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。
Repair and triage guide for the NV oOS PHPUnit test suite — Docker test environment (incl. cross-worktree one-off runners), CI log triage, and 71 recurring root-cause patterns (hook resets, singleton interference, WP_Error envelope drift, coverage-manifest drift, preset-accounting gaps, and more — see the patterns section). Covers the cluster-by-cluster PR workflow against alpha-working and validation gates. Use when fixing failing PHPUnit tests, triaging CI logs, repairing test drift, deciding between a production fix and a test fix, or starting a new fix cluster.
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。