「business」の検索結果

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck, plan or contract summary in character as a General Counsel archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage or clause, legal risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Meeting preparation, not legal advice. Use when the user asks to "run a general counsel review", "what would legal say about this", "pressure-test the legal exposure in this deal" or "prepare me for the deal committee". Do not use for price, term, renewal or vendor leverage, use procurement-reviewer instead; for lawful basis and data flows, use cdo-reviewer; for security controls, use ciso-reviewer. 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 Data Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, data and AI governance risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CDO review", "pressure-test the data governance in this plan", "what would a CDO say about this", "check the metric definitions and data sources" or "prepare this for the data governance board". Do not use for security controls or third-party security risk, use ciso-reviewer instead; for contract, liability or regulatory terms, use general-counsel-reviewer. 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, plan or restructuring paper in character as a Chief Human Resources Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, people and organisation risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CHRO review", "what would HR say about this", "pressure-test the people impact" or "prepare this for the people committee". Do not use for the employee representatives' own view of a plan, use works-council-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。

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Chief Technology Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings cited to the exact passage, technology risks (architecture, build versus buy, vendor lock-in, security of design, engineering capacity), what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CTO review", "pressure-test the technical side of this plan", "what would a CTO ask about this" or "rehearse the technology seat before the review". Do not use for cash, payback or budget questions, use cfo-reviewer instead; for capacity and timeline questions, use coo-reviewer; for security controls, privacy or compliance, use ciso-reviewer. 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 rollout plan in character as a Frontline Sceptic archetype, the experienced staff member who will live with the change, and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, adoption risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a frontline review", "give me the shop-floor view of this rollout", "pressure-test adoption of this plan" or "what will the team actually say about this". Do not use for employee consultation, monitoring or works council preparation, use works-council-reviewer instead; for people strategy or restructuring, use chro-reviewer; for product evidence, use cpo-reviewer. 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 vendor contract in character as a Head of Procurement archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage or clause, commercial risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "review this from a procurement angle", "what would procurement say about this proposal", "pressure-test this vendor contract commercially", "find the holes before the sourcing committee" or "check the renewal terms like a Head of Procurement would". Do not use for liability, IP, regulatory or signing-authority questions, use general-counsel-reviewer instead; for whether the spend fits the budget, use cfo-reviewer; for vendor security, use ciso-reviewer. 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 an architecture or design decision record (ADR) from the discussion notes, design review minutes, chat threads and diagram descriptions the user provides: context, decision drivers, options considered with arguments as stated, the decision as the group worded it, consequences and a review date, with every factual claim tagged evidenced, asserted or UNKNOWN so unsupported claims are marked for the author to substantiate. Use when the user asks to "write an ADR", "document the architecture decision", "record why we chose this design", "turn these design review notes into a decision record" or "draft the design decision log entry". Do not use for a business or governance decision with no technical design, use decision-memo-builder instead; for the change ticket that implements the decision, 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。

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or product plan in character as a Chief Product Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, product and adoption risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CPO review", "pressure-test this product plan", "what would a CPO say about this", "challenge the user evidence" or "check the roadmap opportunity cost". Do not use for positioning, messaging or launch marketing, use cmo-reviewer instead; for internal staff adoption of a rollout, use frontline-skeptic-reviewer; for what a change asks of paying customers, use customer-advocate-reviewer. 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 Information Security Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review with a verdict, findings cited to specific passages, security and compliance risks and the five interrogation questions a real CISO would ask. Use when the user asks to "run a CISO review", "pressure-test the security of this plan", "what would our CISO say about this" or "check the privacy and third-party risk". Do not use for contract, liability or regulatory-interpretation reviews, use general-counsel-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。

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Chief Operating Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings cited to specific sections, delivery and operational risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a COO review", "pressure-test the delivery plan", "what would our COO say about this", "check the timeline and capacity" or "find the execution gaps before the steering committee". Do not use for financial questions, use cfo-reviewer instead; for architecture or vendor questions, use cto-reviewer. 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 an Investor archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict whose conditions read as terms, findings that cite the exact passage, capital-allocation risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run an investor review", "what would an investor say about this", "pressure-test the capital case" or "prepare me for the investment committee". Do not use for internal budget, cost or finance-function review, use cfo-reviewer instead; for revenue forecast and pipeline, use cro-reviewer. 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, pricing plan, go-to-market plan or forecast in character as a Chief Revenue Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings cited to exact passages, revenue risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CRO review", "pressure-test the revenue plan", "what would sales leadership say about this" or "challenge this forecast". Do not use for partnership, deal-structure or market-positioning reviews, use cbo-reviewer instead; for the finance seat use cfo-reviewer. 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。

ビジネス要件定義書(BRD)の新規作成・更新・レビューを支援する。AI駆動開発成果物フローのビジネス要求(D1)の中でも最上流に位置する成果物であり、ドメイン定義書・プロダクト要求仕様書(PRD)本体・ドメイン要求仕様書群すべての根拠となる業務観点の要求文書。新規プロジェクト立ち上げ時の最初の成果物作成、戦略・スコープの大きな変更、KPI見直しのタイミングで呼び出す。

- Entry point for open-source intelligence, investigation and verification work. Use when asked to investigate, research, verify, vet, check out, look up, background-check, trace, attribute or find someone or something; when a request involves due diligence, KYC or KYB, counterparty or vendor risk, sanctions and PEP screening, AML, fraud, business email compromise

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。

- Corporate due-diligence workflow — resolve a brand or website to its registered legal entity, map group structure and beneficial ownership, profile officers and directors, enumerate the digital estate, and screen litigation, insolvency,… Use when asked to check out, vet or research a company, verify a supplier or counterparty before signing or paying, or assess whether a business is real

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。

- Research companies, directors, shareholders and ultimate beneficial ownership in official corporate registries, filings and offshore datasets — OpenCorporates, UK Companies House and the PSC register, SEC EDGAR, US Secretary of State registries, EU business registers, GLEIF LEI… Use when asked who owns or controls a company, to find a person's other directorships, or to unpick a group 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。

Use when a web project needs business goals, audience, information architecture, conversion priorities, content hierarchy, constraints, or design CTQs clarified before visual design begins.

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 the user asks to "optimize meta tags", "write title tags / meta descriptions", "add Open Graph or Twitter cards", or "generate schema / JSON-LD" for FAQ, HowTo, Article, Product, or LocalBusiness rich-result candidates. Produces title/description options, an OG+Twitter block, and validated JSON-LD for the document head. Not for body copy — use content-writer; not for crawl/index technical issues — use technical-seo-checker. 标题优化/元描述/Schema标记/结构化数据

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 the user asks to "design an email A/B test", "set up a multivariate subject/CTA test", "run a send-time test", "build a hold-out group", or "is this email result statistically and practically material?"; produces a falsifiable hypothesis, one-variable-per-cell matrix, sample-size/MDE/duration/power plan, and an effect/uncertainty read from own ESP data. Applies only a precommitted owner-approved action rule; the helper never chooses a business action. Not for EQS/vetoes or writing the email. 邮件AB测试设计/多变量测试/发送时间测试/留出组/显著性判定

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 the user asks to "build programmatic SEO pages", "generate pages at scale", "rank on a high-authority third-party site", "borrow domain authority", "build a vs / alternative page", "do local SEO", "optimize a Google Business Profile", or "fix NAP" — one page-build router with four modes: programmatic (template × dataset systems), parasite (barnacle publishing on Medium/Reddit/LinkedIn/GitHub), comparison (vs / alternative pages in four formats), and local (GBP + NAP + citations + location pages), each with its own thin/duplicate, honesty, or reputation-abuse guardrail. Not for finding what to target — use keyword-research or content-gap-analysis; not for drafting one standalone article — use content-writer; not for scoring a page for publish — use content-quality-auditor. 程序化SEO/批量页面/寄生SEO/借势权重/对比页/vs页/替代页/本地SEO/谷歌商家档案/NAP一致性

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 the user asks to "design an A/B test", "set up a creative/landing test", "run an incrementality test", or "is this result statistically and practically material?"; produces a hypothesis, variant matrix, sample-size/duration/power plan, and a documented effect/uncertainty read from own exported results. It applies only a precommitted owner-approved action rule; the statistical helper never chooses a business action. Not for producing variants — use ad-creative-builder; not for reading back one shipped change — use paid-measurement-loop. 广告AB测试设计/实验设计/显著性判定/增效测试

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 when wiring validation, error handling, or framework adapters. Concentrate guards at system boundaries (CLI, config, network, external APIs); trust internal types and keep business logic in pure functions.

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。

Implements BLoC (v9.x) event-driven state management for Flutter with unidirectional data flow using the flutter_bloc package. Use when implementing Bloc/Cubit classes, mapping Events to States, consuming state with BlocBuilder/BlocListener/BlocConsumer, applying event transformers (restartable/droppable/sequential) for concurrency control, setting up BlocProvider/MultiBlocProvider DI, integrating Freezed for sealed union types and exhaustive pattern matching, or testing with blocTest. Ideal for enterprise apps requiring business logic separation, precise concurrency control (search debouncing, form deduplication), or event replay 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。

Covers Flutter testing across all three layers: unit tests (business logic, ViewModels, repositories), widget tests (UI rendering, interactions, golden regression), and integration/E2E tests (full app flows, native OS interactions). Use this skill when writing any Flutter test, setting up mocking with mocktail or mockito, implementing golden file tests, debugging async failures (pumpAndSettle timeouts, Timer leaks, FakeAsync deadlocks), fixing cross-platform golden pixel diffs in CI/CD, testing state management (Riverpod/BLoC/Provider), handling permission dialogs or native system UI with Patrol, or troubleshooting MediaQuery/Theme missing errors in widget tests.

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。