2,265 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Calculate polygenic risk scores using PRSice-2, LDpred2, or PRS-CS from GWAS summary statistics. Use when predicting disease risk from genome-wide genetic variants.
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。
Quantifies crypto market regime health using free, keyless public data (CoinGecko + Binance funding). Generates a 0-100 composite score across 6 components (100 = risk-on) with a posture recommendation. No API key required. Use when user asks about crypto market conditions, whether it's alt season, BTC dominance, crypto risk-on vs risk-off, funding rates, or whether crypto exposure should be increased or reduced.
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。
Calculate risk-based position sizes for long stock trades. Use when user asks about position sizing, how many shares to buy, risk per trade, Kelly criterion, ATR-based sizing, fractional-share sizing, or portfolio risk allocation. Supports stop-loss distance calculation, volatility scaling, and sector concentration checks.
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。
Trigger a pre-merge release readiness review on a GitHub PR, GitLab MR, or local branch. Use when the user wants to analyze code changes for risk, correctness, and potential rollback issues before merging. Trigger words include release readiness, analyze PR, analyze MR, review PR, risk analysis, pre-merge, safe to ship, ready to merge, ready to commit, any risks, before merging, validate changes, release management.
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。
FAIR-aligned exposure quantification: turns a pile of recon findings into a defensible 0-100 + A-F org risk score (Likelihood x Impact, three ownership-aware factors: exposure/threat/impact), an ownership + proof demotion cap so unproven or weakly-owned findings can't inflate the number, a $-denominated FAIR loss-magnitude estimate (IBM/Ponemon per-record cost bands, cross-source record dedup, threat-factor annualization), attack-path amplification (curated red-team chain catalog + generic graph-walk engine, with a kill-chain vs shared-fate honesty gate), and a board-ready one-pager deliverable (hero $ + letter grade + top-3 findings + top attack path + the ask). Extends osint-methodology's severity rubric and client deliverable templates with quantification. Passive analysis only -- operates on findings already collected, no target traffic, no API keys. Use when asked to score risk, quantify exposure, estimate breach cost, build a board report, translate technical findings to dollars, or explain why a grade or dollar figure came out the way it did.
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。
Owns the security posture of the organization — architecture, program strategy, risk acceptance, incident command, and the authority to stop work that creates unacceptable exposure. Use this for a security strategy or program decision, when a technical choice creates security risk that needs a verdict, when deciding whether to accept or block a risk, when standing up a security function, or when security and delivery priorities conflict and someone has to decide.
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。
Generates the "Risk of Bias" results section for a meta-analysis based on assessment tables and statistics. Use when the user wants to draft the risk of bias analysis text from provided data tables.
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 validating an existing prognostic risk signature on an external bulk expression cohort with survival outcomes, producing risk scores, Kaplan-Meier curves, risk distribution plots, heatmap, and time-dependent ROC curves. NOT for: model training, feature selection, nomogram construction, calibration analysis, or single-cell data.
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。
Monitor portfolio risk, R-multiples, and position limits. Creates hedging strategies, calculates expectancy, and implements stop-losses. Use PROACTIVELY for risk assessment, trade tracking, or portfolio protection.
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。
Create a qualitative risk register and mitigation plan using a Probability x Impact matrix. Use when a project needs structured risk identification, scoring, ownership, and response planning.
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。
Check AI output before you trust or use it — where it's likely wrong, what to verify, and how to catch confident-sounding errors. Use when asked can I trust this AI answer, how do I verify what AI told me, fact-check this AI output, or is this AI response reliable. Produces a risk read on the specific output (the claims most likely to be wrong or made up), the parts that need independent verification vs the parts that are low-risk, how to actually verify each, the tells of AI hallucination and overconfidence, and a habit for building verification into your AI use — because AI is confidently wrong often enough that unchecked trust is a real risk.
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 code coverage and CRAP (Change Risk Anti-Patterns) scores to identify high-risk code. Use OpenCover format with ReportGenerator for Risk Hotspots showing cyclomatic complexity and untested code paths.
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。
Constructs and validates polygenic risk scores using LDpred2-auto, SBayesRC, MegaPRS, PRS-CS, PROSPER, MUSSEL, BridgePRS, JointPRS, PRSmix, or PGS Catalog Calculator with ancestry-aware reference panels (HapMap3, UKB-LD), ancestry-conditional calibration, and PRS-RS reporting standards. Use when computing PRS for cohorts, applying absolute-risk transformation, assessing cross-ancestry portability (Martin 2017 / Ding 2023 continuous ancestry), or auditing PRS manuscripts against the 22-item PRS-RS reviewer checklist.
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 and generate the manual-first evidence pack for high-risk work. Covers 6 high-risk class definitions and the 5-artifact schema required before finalizing, pushing, or handing 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。
Review a business plan from the perspective of a hostile devil's advocate. Asks: what kills this in month 6? What's everyone politely not mentioning? Outputs a verdict — EXISTENTIAL RISK / SOLVABLE RISKS / LOW-RISK / WRONG QUESTION. Use after the investor/customer/operator reviews are done, as the final gauntlet before committing real time and money. Triggered by: 'skeptic review', 'devil's advocate', 'what would kill this', 'red team this', '泼冷水', '杀手在哪'.
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 ISO 42001 AI Management System (AIMS) compliance advisor. Use this skill whenever a user asks about ISO/IEC 42001:2023, AI governance, AI management systems, AI risk assessment, AI system impact assessment, Annex A controls for AI, Statement of Applicability for AI systems, AI policy, responsible AI, AI lifecycle management, AI incident management, AI transparency, AI bias, AI certification readiness, or any topic related to implementing or auditing an AI Management System. Also trigger for questions like "how do I become ISO 42001 certified?", "what controls does ISO 42001 require?", "how do I assess AI risk under 42001?", "what is an AIMS?", or any request involving organisational governance of AI systems, responsible AI frameworks, or AI regulatory compliance aligned to an ISO standard.
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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) advisor covering CSF 2.0 and CSF 1.1. Use this skill whenever a user asks about NIST CSF, cybersecurity risk management, the six CSF functions (Govern, Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, Recover), CSF profiles, implementation tiers, gap assessments, organizational profiles, community profiles, CSF core subcategories, informative references, or mapping to other frameworks (NIST SP 800-53, ISO 27001, CIS Controls, COBIT). Also trigger for questions like "how do I implement NIST CSF?", "what does CSF 2.0 change?", "help me build a CSF profile", "how do I assess my cybersecurity posture?", or any request involving organizational cybersecurity risk strategy or framework alignment.
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。
EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) compliance advisor — risk classification across all four tiers, all 9 prohibited practices (Art. 5, including the nudification/CSAM prohibition from Dec 2, 2026), all 8 Annex III high-risk use case areas, provider and deployer obligations (Arts. 9–17, 26), GPAI model obligations including the July 2025 Code of Practice (Arts. 51–55), conformity assessment and CE marking (Arts. 43–48), EU AI database registration, Art. 50 transparency (chatbots, synthetic media, AI-generated content), governance (AI Office, AI Board), penalties (Art. 99), confirmed phase-in timeline (Digital Omnibus, Reg. (EU) 2026/1744, in force July 27, 2026: Annex III deferred to Dec 2, 2027; Annex I to Aug 2, 2028), and cross-framework mapping to ISO 42001, NIST AI RMF, and GDPR. Use for any EU AI regulation, AI system classification, or AI compliance question. Current as of August 2026. GPAI enforcement powers active since August 2, 2026.
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 SOC 2 compliance assistant covering all five Trust Services Criteria (Security/CC, Availability/A, Confidentiality/C, Processing Integrity/PI, Privacy/P). Use this skill whenever a user mentions SOC 2, Trust Services Criteria, SOC 2 Type 1 or Type 2, audit readiness, compliance gaps, control documentation, evidence collection, vendor risk questionnaires, or anything related to AICPA service organization controls. Trigger even for adjacent topics like "we need to get audited", "a customer asked for our security report", "writing an information security policy", or "preparing for an audit". Covers gap analysis, policy writing, control documentation, audit evidence preparation, and vendor risk reviews for organizations at any maturity level — from first-time startups to seasoned compliance teams.
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。
EU NIS2 Directive (Directive (EU) 2022/2555) compliance advisor for essential and important entities: entity classification, Art. 21 risk management measures, Art. 23 incident reporting timelines (24h/72h/1 month), Art. 20 governance obligations, supply chain security (Art. 21(2)(d); coordinated risk assessments Art. 22), gap assessments, policy drafting, ISO 27001 alignment, and penalty exposure analysis. Also covers Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, the technical/methodological sub-requirements for Art. 21(2) and the significant-incident thresholds binding on DNS/cloud/data-centre/MSP/MSSP/trust-service and other digital entities. Use for NIS2 readiness, transposition questions, ENISA technical implementation guidance, significant-incident thresholds, supervisory differences between essential and important entities, and cross-border coordination.
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。
Senior PM for enterprise software and SaaS — portfolio management, quantitative risk analysis, prioritization, and executive reporting. Use for portfolio health reviews, board-ready status reports, and multi-project risk/capacity analysis.
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。
Assess IT vendors and third-party partners with multi-factor risk scoring and regulatory compliance checklists. Use when evaluating technology vendors.
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。
AI leadership advisor on AI strategy, governance, risk, investment, and org design. Use when defining an AI strategy, building an AI governance program, scoring AI maturity, or drafting an AI risk register.
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。
Legal leadership advisor on legal strategy, risk, contract governance, and regulatory tracking. Use when defining a legal strategy, scoring legal risk, auditing the contract portfolio, or building a regulatory calendar.
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。