「framework」の検索結果

Implement Terraform provider ephemeral resources with the Plugin Framework: the Open/Renew/Close lifecycle, ephemeral schema design, registration via EphemeralResources, renewal for expiring credentials, and how ephemeral values flow into write-only attributes and provider configuration. Use when adding an ephemeral resource, exposing secrets/tokens/certificates that must never persist in state or plan, deciding between an ephemeral resource and a data source, or wiring short-lived credentials from one provider into another.

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。

Implement Terraform Provider actions using the Plugin Framework. Use when developing imperative operations that execute at lifecycle events (before/after create, update, destroy).

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 this when scaffolding a new Terraform provider with the Plugin Framework: workspace layout, go module setup, provider server main.go, and a provider.go with schema and Configure. Also use when a user wants to start building a provider for a new API or asks how to begin a terraform-provider-* project.

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。

Implement Terraform provider configuration and authentication with the Plugin Framework: provider schema for credentials (Optional + Sensitive attributes), environment variable fallbacks, credential provider chains (static config, then environment variables, shared credentials file, and platform identity), unknown-value guards in Configure(), secret redaction, configure-time credential validation, and diagnostics that name every source tried. Use when implementing or reviewing a provider's Configure method or provider schema, adding authentication options (API keys, tokens, profiles, credentials files, assume-role), deciding how a provider should resolve credentials, debugging "no valid credential sources" or missing-credentials errors, or unit testing credential resolution.

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 provider acceptance test patterns using terraform-plugin-testing with the Plugin Framework. Covers test structure, TestCase/TestStep fields, ConfigStateChecks with custom statecheck.StateCheck implementations, plan checks, CompareValue for cross-step assertions, config helpers, import testing with ImportStateKind, sweepers, and scenario patterns (basic, update, disappears, validation, regression), and ephemeral resource testing with the echoprovider package. Use when writing, reviewing, or debugging provider acceptance tests, including questions about statecheck, plancheck, TestCheckFunc, CheckDestroy, ExpectError, import state verification, ephemeral resources, or how to structure test 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。

Plan a creative testing roadmap with script-computed sample sizes. Fatigue → creative-health. "build a creative testing 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。

Comprehensive Test Driven Development guide for engineering subagents with multi-framework support, coverage analysis, and intelligent test generation

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 coordinating multiple AI agents with Agent Relay's workflow engine and need to pick the right orchestration pattern - covers the 10 core patterns (fan-out, pipeline, hub-spoke, consensus, mesh, handoff, cascade, dag, debate, hierarchical) plus 14 specialized ones, with decision framework and accurate SDK/YAML examples.

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。

Build custom LLM evaluation pipelines using the OpenJudge framework. Covers selecting and configuring graders (LLM-based, function-based, agentic), running batch evaluations with GradingRunner, combining scores with aggregators, applying evaluation strategies (voting, average), auto-generating graders from data, and analyzing results (pairwise win rates, statistics, validation metrics). Use when the user wants to evaluate LLM outputs, compare multiple models, design scoring criteria, or build an automated evaluation system.

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。

Build RL reward signals using the OpenJudge framework. Covers choosing between pointwise and pairwise reward strategies based on RL algorithm, task type, and cost; aggregating multi-dimensional pointwise scores into a scalar reward; pairwise tournament reward for GRPO on subjective tasks (net win rate across group rollouts); generating preference pairs for DPO/RLAIF; and normalizing scores for training stability. Use when building reward models, scoring rollouts for GRPO/REINFORCE, generating preference data for DPO, or doing Best-of-N selection.

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。

Identify and navigate genuine dilemmas in curriculum, school, or community contexts — tensions between competing goods that cannot be solved, only navigated. Produces a structured dilemma map with both poles named and both/and possibilities.

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。

Map a scoped topic across three coexisting horizons — current system under strain (H1), preferred future (H3), and transition innovations sorted as H2+ or H2- — to understand change dynamics and identify responsible next actions.

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。

Design a structured goal-setting protocol using SMART or implementation-intention frameworks for students. Use when launching units, projects, or developing student self-direction habits.

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。

Define the scope and purpose of a complex inquiry before mapping or futures work begins. Use when a class or group needs to agree what they are investigating, who it matters to, and at what scale.

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。

Structure a decision or design challenge through multiple perspectives before committing to action. Use as a synthesis step after scoping, mapping, and dilemma navigation when a group needs a wiser next step.

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。

Structure a student's self-determined project with mentoring checkpoints, competency alignment, and reflection. Use when guiding student-led projects within a competency-based framework.

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 argument structure scaffolds using Toulmin, PEEL, or CER frameworks for a specific claim or question. Use when teaching argumentative or analytical writing across any subject.

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。

Tags harness-decomposed curriculum items (KUDs, LTs, criteria) with a school's developmental band metadata while preserving source voice and labels. Supply the band schema; the skill derives mapping rules from 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。

Risk-based vendor assessment framework for IT service providers, technology vendors, and third-party partners under DORA, NIS2, GDPR. Provides three-phase process (Initial Screening / Detailed Assessment / Final Evaluation), six-dimension risk scoring (Financial/Operational/Compliance/Security/Reputational/Strategic) with weighted matrices, full DORA Art. 28-30 contractual checklist, NIS2 Art. 21(2) security measures enumeration, GDPR Art. 28 documentation checks, red flags per dimension, trigger-based review criteria, and document templates. Use when: (1) Evaluating new vendors or technology providers, (2) Conducting critical ICT third-party due diligence under DORA, (3) Performing supply chain security assessment under NIS2, (4) Creating vendor onboarding documentation, (5) Establishing ongoing vendor monitoring, (6) Assessing concentration risk, or (7) Generating executive vendor risk reports.

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。

First-pass framework for reading, interpreting, and structuring statutory analysis of US federal, state, and local law. Produces draft analysis for attorney review — not legal advice. Use this skill whenever the user references a specific US statute, regulation, ordinance, or rule by citation, asks "what does [statute X] require," asks for compliance scoping, applicability thresholds, requirement extraction, exemption analysis, definitional analysis, federal preemption analysis, or multi-state comparison — even if they don't explicitly ask for "statutory analysis." Halts and asks for missing inputs rather than guessing. Out of scope for non-US law.

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。

Brief statutes and legislative Acts using the MAPS + RULES framework. Use when briefing statutes, analyzing legislative text, mapping statutory structure, extracting rule-modules from provisions, applying statutes to scenarios, or any statutory analysis task. Triggers include "brief this statute," "analyze this Act," "map the statute," "apply [statute] to [scenario]," "what are the elements of [provision]," "statutory analysis," or references to codified sections (such as 42 U.S.C. sections or Texas Health & Safety Code). Supports two modes - (A) text-only briefing for structural analysis, and (B) scenario-driven briefing that applies statutory provisions to specific facts.

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。

Critically assess and improve a legal scholarly thesis, article idea, student note, seminar-paper claim, or research agenda using Eugene Volokh's novelty, nonobviousness, utility, and soundness framework, connector-aware research, claim-specific tests, and a sustainable adversarial pass. Produces a self-contained green-, yellow-, or red-light report. Use when a law professor or law student asks whether a claim is viable, novel, publishable, preempted, useful, worth pursuing, or better than competing topics; or wants a thesis stress-tested, narrowed, repaired, or compared. No connector is required: use connected legal and scholarly research when available, public sources otherwise, and disclose any no-research fallback.

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。

Systematic contract negotiation strategies for technology services agreements with German/EU law specificity. Provides three-position framework (provider-favorable, balanced, client-favorable), deal-size calibration (€100K to €10M+), five-tier objection handling with regulatory leverage (GDPR, DORA, NIS2, BGB), concession packaging, and position matrices for liability, IP, payment, SLA, data protection, and termination. Use when: (1) Developing negotiation strategies for SaaS, cloud, or managed services agreements, (2) Preparing position papers and fallback positions, (3) Responding to counterparty objections, (4) Structuring concession packages that protect core economics, (5) Calibrating tactics to deal size and leverage, or (6) Applying German contract law constraints (BGB §§ 305-310 AGB, § 309 Nr. 7 liability limits, § 288 statutory interest).

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。

Expert SWIFT Customer Security Programme (CSP) advisor covering the Customer Security Controls Framework (CSCF v2026). Use this skill whenever a user asks about SWIFT CSP, CSCF controls, SWIFT security attestation, KYC-SA portal, SWIFT architecture types (A1/A2/A3/A4/B), mandatory vs advisory controls, independent assessment, SWIFT secure zone, secure flow zone, MFA for operators, SWIFT messaging security, payment fraud prevention on SWIFT, gap analysis for CSCF, or compliance with SWIFT's 32 controls (25 mandatory, 7 advisory in v2026) across the three objectives: Secure Your Environment, Know and Limit Access, Detect and Respond. Control 2.4 (Back-Office Data Flow Security) is now mandatory in v2026. v2026 attestation window is July 1– December 31, 2026. Trigger for any SWIFT CSP or CSCF compliance question.

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。