264 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Captures executable contracts and coding conventions into .trellis/spec/ documents. Use when learning something valuable from debugging, implementing, or discussion that should be preserved for future 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。
Produces an adversarial attack on a legal argument that survives reply. Runs the opposing-counsel discipline twice: an unrestrained first pass, then the same instrument turned on that pass to cut every point that collapses under challenge - attacks on conceded facts, wrong-forum objections, speculation about documents and motives, gotchas with innocent explanations, overclaims, self-refuting assertions, and padding. The deliverable is one standalone attack containing only what can be defended, capped at five heads, not a discussion of the discarded draft. Use to attack, stress-test, red-team or rebut a submission, brief, motion, witness statement, letter or structured legal reasoning. Triggers on "attack this but only with points that hold", "no cheap shots", "what survives reply", "which points can I actually defend", "give me the version I can file", "double-pass adversarial review". Also use when an earlier adversarial review came back overlong or scattershot. Formal British 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。
Elite incident response and legal compliance guidance for data breaches under GDPR Articles 33 & 34. Use when: (1) User reports a data breach or security incident — including "is this even a personal data breach?" triage, (2) User asks about breach notification obligations or deadlines, (3) User mentions "72 hours", Art. 33, Art. 34, or notification requirements, (4) Discussion involves security incidents affecting personal data, (5) User needs breach risk assessment using ENISA methodology, (6) User mentions "Data Breach" or "Incident" or "Data Leakage" or "Ransomware" or "Exfiltration", (7) User needs to determine Controller vs Processor obligations, (8) Cross-border breach scenarios requiring Lead SA determination, (9) User needs a mitigation playbook or immediate response recommendations, (10) User needs audit-ready breach documentation (.docx) or an EDPB-template-aligned breach notification / evidence file — including follow-up and withdrawal notifications, (11) Breach involves an AI system requiring AI Act Art. 73 serious incident screening.
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 structured perspective-taking activities with anti-projection guardrails. Develops genuine understanding of complexity across history, social sciences, and literature — not performed empathy.
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 a Socratic questioning sequence that develops conceptual understanding through guided inquiry. Use when facilitating philosophical discussions, concept exploration, or critical examination.
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 or publishes authorized, fact-checked GitHub Discussions announcements; does not create releases.
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。
Enhanced academic paper review response workflow with Agy/CLI collaborative analysis and multi-perspective discussion. Produces structured rebuttal documents with evidence-based strategies. Triggers on "rebuttal", "respond to reviewers", "review response", "审稿回复".
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。
Creates visual concepts for album artwork and generates AI art prompts. Use during planning for concept discussion, or after all tracks are Final for actual artwork 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。
Creates a new album with the correct directory structure and templates. Use IMMEDIATELY when the user says 'make a new album' or similar, before any discussion.
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。
Converge the screened direction pool into a small, discussion-ready shortlist, writing `output/trace/IDEA_SHORTLIST.md`.
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 a compact pool of discussion-worthy research directions from the signal table, writing `output/trace/IDEA_DIRECTION_POOL.md`.
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 paper notes + taxonomy into a signal table of tensions, missing pieces, and promising academic axes for brainstorm discussion. Writes `output/trace/IDEA_SIGNAL_TABLE.md`.
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。
Write the survey's front matter files (Abstract, Introduction, Related Work, Discussion, Conclusion) in paper voice, with high citation density and a single evidence-policy paragraph.
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。
Synthesize the shortlist into a discussion-ready research idea brainstorm memo, writing `output/REPORT.md`, `output/APPENDIX.md`, and `output/REPORT.json`.
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。
Screen the direction pool with a discussion-first scoring pass, writing `output/trace/IDEA_SCREENING_TABLE.md`.
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。
Launch and continue the Volcengine AI Research survey workflow for concept testing, audience design, questionnaire drafting, interview guide generation, execution confirmation, progress checks, and result queries. Use this skill when the user wants to create, revise, confirm, execute, or follow up on a real AI research survey task in ABCompass instead of doing generic brainstorming, copywriting, translation, summarization, or broad market discussion.
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。
Search and analyze Reddit content using semantic AI search via reddit-insights.com MCP server. Use when you need to: (1) Find user pain points and frustrations for product ideas, (2) Discover niche markets or underserved needs, (3) Research what people really think about products/topics, (4) Find content inspiration from real discussions, (5) Analyze sentiment and trends on Reddit, (6) Validate business ideas with real user feedback. Triggers: reddit search, find pain points, market research, user feedback, what do people think about, reddit trends, niche discovery, product validation.
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。
PavedPath Code is the code-focused edition of PavedPath. It helps agents solve software engineering problems by finding proven implementation paths from GitHub repositories, issues, pull requests, discussions, code examples, release notes, and open-source evidence.
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。
PROACTIVELY search conversation history when receiving user instructions. Find previous discussions, decisions, and context BEFORE starting new work. Your memory is valuable - use 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。
This skill should be used when handling issue intake rotation duties for the Positron repository. It provides workflows for reviewing and organizing new issues, responding to discussions, handling support tickets, and searching for related content. Use this skill when on intake rotation duty, when helping someone with intake tasks, or when learning the intake rotation 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。
Turn supplied meeting notes or transcripts into sourced minutes, keeping discussion, statements, confirmed/proposed decisions and proposed actions distinct.
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。
Foundational software design principles applied specifically to robotics module development. Use this skill when designing robot software modules, structuring codebases, making architecture decisions, reviewing robotics code, or building reusable robotics libraries. Trigger whenever the user mentions SOLID principles for robots, modular robotics software, clean architecture for robots, dependency injection in robotics, interface design for hardware, real-time design constraints, error handling strategies for robots, configuration management, separation of concerns in perception-planning- control, composability of robot behaviors, or any discussion of software craftsmanship in a robotics context. Also trigger for code reviews of robotics code, refactoring robot software, or designing APIs for robotics libraries.
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。
Search and record project memory (Discussions, journal, ADRs). Use before re-investigating anything. Do not use for settled battles; see failure-archaeology.
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。
Deeply research technical architecture, source code, mechanisms, SDKs, frameworks, project comparisons, and system-design options across repositories, history, official docs, issues, discussions, and high-quality community signals. Use when the user asks for deep research, source-level understanding, architecture comparison, mechanism satisfaction, or evidence for designing a system. Always map the question and obtain confirmation before beginning substantive research; skip for simple factual lookups or straightforward implementation 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。