7,574 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
METAINFORMANT rules for directory src/metainformant/protein/structure. Use when editing, adding tests, or reviewing code under this path. Read the linked AGENTS.md first; use uv only, write outputs to output/, real implementations.
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。
METAINFORMANT rules for directory scripts/gwas/structure. Use when editing, adding tests, or reviewing code under this path. Read the linked AGENTS.md first; use uv only, write outputs to output/, real implementations.
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。
METAINFORMANT rules for directory projects/hymenoptera_amalgkit/doc/01_infrastructure. Use when editing, adding tests, or reviewing code under this path. Read the linked AGENTS.md first; use uv only, write outputs to output/, real implementations.
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。
Analyze the current repo structure, build system, test setup, and conventions to provide a practical onboarding guide. Use when new to a codebase, joining a project, or wanting to understand how a repo is organized. Triggers on getting started, new to repo, onboard, how does this repo work, repo structure, codebase overview.
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 NASA Systems Modeling Handbook for Systems Engineering (NASA-HDBK-1009A Rev A, 2025). Use for model-based systems engineering (MBSE) wired into NASA's NPR 7123.1 SE processes: the three aspects of MBSE (language / methodology / framework), the NASA SE Engine and its two OOSEM-derived steps (Model Planning, Setting Up the Model), the Modeling Plan as a SEMP subset, the tool-agnostic NASA SE metamodel of elements and relationships across the four SysML pillars (structure / behavior / requirements / parametrics), worked SysML diagrams and tables for stakeholders, requirements, structure and V&V, generating SE work products (ConOps, MOE, MOP, TPM, V&V), the MBSE Grid framework, alternative modeling approaches (PBR, Scenario, System Specification, Verification), and the ConOps model-content template. Scope is bounded to four common technical processes (Stakeholder Expectation Definition, Technical Requirements Definition, Product Verification, Product Validation). Does NOT teach SysML itself, mandate a tool, define NPR 7123.1 processes, cover technical-management processes 10-17, or reproduce the OMG SysML specification.
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 before writing logic: choosing core types and data structures, sequencing scaffold-vs-feature work, asking what concurrent actors share. Get the data structures right so downstream code becomes obvious.
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。
Structured problem solving in 6 steps: Problem definition, goals, brainstorming, evaluation, implementation, and review.
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。
Meta-skill: Structured thinking as a 3-phase workflow. Combines analysis (think), ideation (brainstorm), and decision-making (decide) into one continuous process.
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 the text and structure of a document, slide deck or web page against the accessibility rules the user supplies, or a default set covering heading structure, image alternative text, colour used as the only cue, link text, reading order, tables and language, and returns numbered findings with location, rule, severity and a ready-to-apply fix for the author, plus proposed alt text and a list of checks that need a tool or a person. Use when the user asks to "check this document for accessibility", "review the alt text in this deck", "is this page accessible", "run an accessibility check on these slides", "find accessibility issues before I publish" or "check my headings and link text". Do not use for brand or template compliance of slides, use branded-deck-builder 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 DRAFT structured interview scorecard from a job description: five to eight competencies traced to it, past-behaviour and situational evidence questions with probes, four-level rating anchors written as observable behaviours, a blank scoring sheet, a panel plan and the items the hiring manager must confirm. Use when the user asks to "build an interview scorecard for this job description", "write competency questions for this role", "draft the interview guide for the panel", "set up a rating scale for the interviewers", "put together a structured interview kit" or "create a hiring rubric from the JD". Do not use for writing or fixing the job description itself, use job-description-drafter instead; for the new hire's first 90 days, use onboarding-plan-builder. 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。
Proposes tag and number structures for the new lines and instruments in a P&ID draft according to the project's numbering procedures, checks every tag extracted from the PFD against the quoted procedure format, and lists cross-section identifier mismatches and the registry checks a human must run. Never invents a numbering convention, never alters a PFD tag and never assigns a sequence number the procedure reserves for the registry. Use when the user asks to "run the tagging and numbering section", "check the tags against the numbering procedure", "propose the tag structure for the new lines and instruments" or "list the registry checks before validation" after the process safety flags. Do not use for validating the four sections, use validation-and-review-package instead; do not use for instrument content, use instrumentation-and-control-enrichment. 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 a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Chief Business Officer archetype, covering commercial model, partnerships, deal structure, market positioning, strategic fit and opportunity cost, and returns a DRAFT review with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, commercial risks and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CBO review", "pressure-test this partnership", "check the deal structure" or "what would a commercial executive say about this". Do not use for pipeline, quota, sales-motion or forecast reviews, use cro-reviewer 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。
Generate production-quality Excalidraw architecture diagrams from natural language. Visual structure maps to conceptual structure — fan-out for one-to-many, timelines for sequences, convergence for aggregation. Includes self-validation via Playwright render review.
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。
Guide users through a structured workflow for co-authoring documentation. Use when user wants to write documentation, proposals, technical specs, decision docs, or similar structured content. This workflow helps users efficiently transfer context, refine content through iteration, and verify the doc works for readers. Trigger when user mentions writing docs, creating proposals, drafting specs, or similar documentation 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。
Audit on-page SEO and GEO (generative engine optimization) signals across the site — title tags, meta descriptions, H1/H2/H3 hierarchy, canonical tags, Open Graph, structured data, content length, internal link density, and AI-citation readiness. Use this skill whenever the user asks to "audit SEO", "check metadata", "review titles and descriptions", "check heading structure", "run an SEO audit", "GEO audit", "check schema markup", "find SEO issues", or review any on-page signal affecting organic or AI-search visibility. Output is a prioritized issue list with per-page findings and fixes.
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。
Spectral vector search using graph Laplacian eigenstructure. Use when cosine/L2 similarity misses latent structure in your embeddings.
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。
Guide users through a structured workflow for co-authoring documentation. Use when user wants to write documentation, proposals, technical specs, decision docs, or similar structured content. This workflow helps users efficiently transfer context, refine content through iteration, and verify the doc works for readers. Trigger when user mentions writing docs, creating proposals, drafting specs, or similar documentation 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。
Documentation structure and maintenance rules for the Megahub project. Use whenever making user-facing changes — adding features, changing behavior, fixing hardware compatibility, or modifying configuration. Describes which files to update, the README structure, and writing style.
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。
Core firmware context for the Megahub ESP32 project. Use when working on PlatformIO configuration, build scripts, library structure, main.cpp, or general ESP32 firmware development. Covers build system, project structure, common pitfalls, and debugging.
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。
差分が「その差分自身を審査するレビュー基準・品質ゲート」を弱めていないかを diff-time で検出する。Check 1 レビュールールの削除・弱体化（.river/rules.md / .river/rules.d/*）、Check 2 実行時コンフィグの閾値・ゲート緩和（.river-review.{json,yaml,yml} の review.severity 引き下げ / exclude 拡大 / memory.suppressionEnabled 無効化 / selection.skills.exclude 追加）、Check 3 suppression entry の新規追加、Check 4 lint・静的解析設定からのルール削除や無効化、Check 5 branch protection・required check の緩和、の 5 Check を対象とし、これらが機能変更と同一 PR に混在し、かつ意図の宣言が無い場合に指摘する。report-only。workflow の permissions / action pin は gha-workflow-security、既存 suppression entry の使い分けは suppression-feedback、設定ファイルの一般的妥当性は config-json、.only / .skip / @ts-ignore / @ts-nocheck は heuristic-review.mjs の決定論検出器、リファクタと機能追加の混在は behavior-structure-separation へ委譲する
リファクタリングを「更新されたチームの理解と、コードが表現する過去の理解の差分同期」と捉え、今回得た新知識（要求・ドメイン知識・制約）が naming と responsibility へ反映されているか、boundary が現在の understanding を表現しているか、diff の削除行やコメントに現れる過去の design history と constraint を失っていないかを diff-time で確認する。Knowledge Delta の signal は diff（追加/削除された hunk・コメント・ADR 参照）を一次情報とし、PR 本文が供給されるときは補助に用い、不確実なら question に留める。ドメイン用語の一貫性は ubiquitous-language-naming、集約/コンテキスト境界の設計判断は bounded-context-language、投機的抽象化・caller special-case は altitude-generalization、スコープ逸脱/前提破壊は fix-scope-integrity、振る舞い変更と構造変更の分離は behavior-structure-separation、完了主張の反証は refactor-claim-audit へ委譲する
Ensure tests use clear naming and cover edge cases with proper describe/it structure.
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。
Repository または subsystem を対象に、source-only で明示的なセキュリティ監査を行う entry skill。 通常の PR セキュリティレビューとは分離し、reconnaissance、scope 固定、既存 security skill への委譲、 evidence と unresolved hypothesis、observe-only SecurityAuditCoverage、coverage critic、 structured audit artifact と repeat-run coverage を扱う。target-controlled code は実行しない。
Infrastructure as Codeベストプラクティスに従って、AWS、Azure、GCPインフラ用の再利用可能なTerraformモジュールを構築します。インフラモジュール作成、クラウドプロビジョニング標準化、再利用可能なIaCコンポーネント実装時に使用します。