1,616 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Use when working on Nuxt 4+ projects - provides server routes, file-based routing, middleware patterns, Nuxt-specific composables, and configuration with latest docs. Covers h3 v1 helpers (validation, WebSocket, SSE) and nitropack v2 patterns. Updated for Nuxt 4.3+.
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 working with Nuxt Content v3 - provides collections (local/remote/API sources), queryCollection API, MDC rendering, database configuration, NuxtStudio integration, hooks, i18n patterns, and LLMs integration
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。
Streamlit Web application development expert skill. Provides guidance on OIDC authentication (st.login/st.logout/st.user), secrets management, data visualization with Plotly/Altair, performance optimization with caching, and modern Streamlit features (v1.42-1.52+). Use this skill when building Streamlit apps, implementing user authentication, creating data dashboards, or optimizing app performance. Triggers include "streamlit app", "st.login", "data dashboard", "streamlit authentication", "streamlit visualization".
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 providing ITIL 4-based IT service management consulting. Use this when organizations need guidance on implementing ITIL 4 practices, improving service management maturity, optimizing IT operations, or aligning IT services with business objectives. Provides tailored recommendations based on department, scenario, and organizational context using comprehensive ITIL 4 knowledge.
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 skill when creating executive-level briefing materials, board reports, management meeting presentations, or investor briefings. This skill provides the "So What? / Why Now? / What Next?" framework, data visualization guidelines optimized for executives, and professional templates for rapid document creation. Triggers include "create board report", "executive summary", "management meeting materials", "investor presentation", "one-page summary", or requests to communicate complex information to senior 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。
Professional contract review skill for business agreements including NDAs, MSAs, SLAs, SOWs, and software license agreements. Provides systematic clause-by-clause analysis, risk assessment with quantified scoring, red flag detection, and negotiation guidance. Use this skill when reviewing vendor contracts, partnership agreements, service agreements, or any business contract requiring risk evaluation and negotiation preparation. Triggers include "review this contract", "analyze this NDA", "check this agreement for risks", "prepare for contract negotiation", or when evaluating terms and conditions.
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 professional presentation materials, slide decks, or proposal documents following FUJISOFT America's corporate template standards. Triggers include requests like "create a presentation", "make slides", "prepare proposal materials", "FUJISOFT template", or when MARP-format Markdown presentations are needed with consistent corporate branding. The skill provides a complete MARP template with CSS styling, visual design components, and quality assurance workflows.
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。
Orchestrates multi-step tasks autonomously using a 3-tier agent hierarchy (Director/Manager/Worker). Use when user says "run this end-to-end", "handle everything", "execute all tasks", or needs parallel task execution with queuing, course correction, and session resume. Provides FIFO task queue, escalation policy, git worktree isolation, and context persistence across agent sessions.
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。
Export Codex rollout/session JSONL as a self-contained HTML report that can be opened offline. Use when a user provides a complete session file path or Codex session ID, or asks to export a Codex session to HTML, generate a session report, or convert a rollout to HTML. Supports exact full-ID lookup in the CODEX_HOME sessions and archived_sessions directories.
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。
Verify a tested web agent's real behavior from its recorded Pi or Codex session and selected screenshots before scoring. The judge prompt provides absolute artifact paths; use targeted queries to compare actual outputs, errors, and the final answer with the recorded behavior, then return only the verdict JSON. Only for ego-bench judging—never to drive a browser or rerun the agent.
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。
Manages shadcn components and projects — adding, searching, fixing, debugging, styling, and composing UI, including chat interfaces. Provides project context, component docs, and usage examples. Applies when working with shadcn/ui, component registries, presets, --preset codes, or any project with a components.json file. Also triggers for "shadcn init", "create an app with --preset", or "switch to --preset".
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。
Interactive guided tour of all available AI coding skills with live demos. Walks through headline capabilities, offers try-it-now demos, discovers repo-specific tools, and provides a cheat sheet reference. Triggers on what can you do, show skills, skill tour, available tools, capabilities, what skills.
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 Human Systems Integration (HSI) Practitioner's Guide (NASA/SP-2015-3709). Use for HSI process implementation, lifecycle phase activities, function allocation, ConOps development, HSI Plan writing, HSI metrics (MOE/MOP/TPM/KPP), HITL testing strategy, HSI team organisation, scaling/tailoring for program size, and V&V planning. Does not cover the specific human engineering design standards (NASA-STD-3001 content) or detailed HFE methods beyond what the guide itself provides.
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。
Developer assistant (ATI successor). Provides a quick project overview via headless scan and routes to the available coding tools: CodeCommander MCP (analysis/refactor/diagnose) and the ellmos-code-tools module. Pure tool routing + scan, no own store.
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 a list of merged changes, closed work items or commit messages the user provides into DRAFT release notes under the version heading and date the user supplies, grouped as features, fixes and other, in the organisation's tone from the style guide or prior notes given, with every entry traced to its source item, breaking changes and required actions flagged first, and internal-only items held back for the release owner to confirm. Use when the user asks to "write the release notes for this version", "turn these merged pull requests into a changelog", "summarise what shipped this sprint for customers", "draft the what's new for this release" or "group these closed tickets into release notes". Do not use for an announcement email or intranet post about a launch, use announcement-drafter instead; for a change ticket, use change-request-pack; for a how-to article about one fix, use knowledge-article-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。
Builds a DRAFT stakeholder map for one project from the charter, organisation chart, RACI, governance terms, steering minutes, meeting notes and messages the user provides: a stakeholder register, interest and influence ratings each with its stated basis, stance as evidenced by a verbatim fragment with source and date, gaps, and a proposed engagement plan per stakeholder, every line traced to a source and every missing fact marked UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "build the stakeholder map", "who are the stakeholders on this project", "map interest and influence", "where does each stakeholder stand", "draft the stakeholder engagement plan" or "refresh the stakeholder register". Do not use for a customer account's stakeholders, use account-plan-builder instead; for a one-page brief before one meeting, use meeting-prep-onepager; for logging decisions and risks against the project, use project-status-tracker. 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。
Prepares a DRAFT data incident impact brief from the incident notes and data inventory the user provides: the timeline as stated, systems involved matched to the inventory, data categories held and evidenced as involved, people and record counts potentially affected with the source and method behind every figure, third parties, notification questions for legal and the data protection officer, and every UNKNOWN with the evidence that would settle it. No legal determination: it never states whether the incident is a reportable breach, whether notice is due, to whom or by when. Use when the user asks to "prepare the impact brief for this incident", "what data was involved", "how many people are affected", "map the incident to our data inventory" or "pull together what legal needs on the incident". Do not use for the blameless postmortem or root-cause timeline, use incident-postmortem-drafter 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。
Summarises one sprint from the board export, sprint report and review or stand-up notes the user provides into a one-page DRAFT sprint review summary: the sprint goal as written, items delivered, items not delivered with the reasons the sources state, carry-over, impediments, metrics exactly as given, and numbered questions for the retrospective, every row referenced to a work item or note fragment and every missing fact marked UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "summarise the sprint", "write the sprint review", "what did we deliver this sprint", "list the carry-over and blockers" or "draft the sprint recap". Do not use for the retrospective write-up or themed lessons across several sprints, use lessons-learned-synthesis instead; for a weekly project status report, use project-status-tracker. 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。
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。
Produces a DRAFT product requirements document from the discovery notes, interview summaries, support themes, analytics notes and stakeholder messages the user provides: problem statement, target users, goals with measures as stated, numbered requirements each with a testable acceptance criterion, non-goals, constraints, dependencies and open questions, with every statement tagged evidenced, assumed or UNKNOWN so each assumption is visible for the product owner to confirm. Use when the user asks to "write a PRD", "draft the product requirements", "turn these discovery notes into requirements", "document what this feature needs to do" or "build the requirements doc for this epic". Do not use for supplier-facing requirements in a tender, use rfp-requirements-pack instead; for a technical design decision, use architecture-decision-record; for the change ticket that ships the work, use change-request-pack. 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。
Prepares a DRAFT vendor risk screening brief from the material the user provides on one vendor (questionnaire answers, certificates, assurance reports, policies, contract extracts): per screening topic, what a document evidences with reference, date and scope, what is only asserted, what is missing or contradicted, certificate and report details as stated, and ready-to-send questions for the vendor and the internal owners. No web research, no risk rating, tier, score or recommendation. Use when the user asks to "screen this vendor", "review the vendor's questionnaire answers", "check what the vendor's certificate covers", "what is missing from this due diligence pack" or "draft the follow-up questions for the vendor". Do not use for answering a customer's questionnaire about your own organisation, use vendor-security-questionnaire-prefill 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 DRAFT user personas from the research notes, interview summaries, survey free text and support themes the user provides: for each persona the goals, pains, jobs to be done, context of use, quotes exactly as supplied with their participant codes, and the evidence count behind every attribute, with names, demographics and any detail no participant stated left UNKNOWN rather than invented. Use when the user asks to "build personas from these interviews", "who are our users based on this research", "draft user personas", "turn these research notes into personas" or "update our personas with the new interviews". Do not use for theming a batch of customer feedback into counts, use customer-feedback-theme-synthesis instead; for exit interviews, use exit-interview-synthesis; for the requirements those personas imply, use product-requirements-draft. 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 one DRAFT message house for a product, service, programme or initiative from the source material the user provides: an umbrella statement, two to four pillars and graded proof points under each, with every proof point that lacks a source flagged, a claim sensitivity table, an audience coverage check and open questions. Use when the user asks to "build a message house", "write our messaging framework", "what are the key messages for this launch", "turn this research into messaging pillars" or "test our current messaging against the evidence". Do not use for a campaign one-pager, use campaign-brief-builder instead; to check whether a written document's claims are substantiated, use claims-evidence-map. 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。