7,546 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Makers 开发专家团 AI Agent 工程师 Skill — Claude Agent SDK、 OpenAI Agents SDK、LangGraph、DeepAgents、CrewAI 框架集成， SSE 流式响应、conversation store、EdgeOne Makers Agent Runtime。 触发词：AI Agent、聊天机器人、LLM 应用、多 Agent 系统、 Claude SDK、OpenAI Agents、LangGraph、CrewAI、SSE 流式、 智能助手、AI 推理端点。
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 assessing cloud infrastructure for security misconfigurations, IAM privilege escalation paths, S3 public exposure, open security group rules, or IaC security gaps. Covers AWS, Azure, and GCP posture assessment with MITRE ATT&CK mapping.
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。
Executes authorized phishing simulation campaigns to assess an organization's susceptibility to email-based social engineering attacks. The tester designs realistic phishing scenarios, builds credential harvesting infrastructure, sends targeted phishing emails, and tracks open rates, click-through rates, and credential submission rates to measure human security awareness. Activates for requests involving phishing simulation, social engineering assessment, email security testing, or security awareness measurement.
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 rating a source with the NATO Admiralty Scale, the user asks "is this reliable?" / "rate this source", or the tradecraft pipeline calls for source assessment before publishing. Reliability A-F, credibility 1-6.
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。
Structured threat assessment methodology. Intent + Capability + Opportunity = Threat Level. Use when formally evaluating a threat. Prefers graded evidence items from /quality-of-information-check and runs that skill first when handed raw URLs or text. Confidence is capped by the weakest load-bearing claim, and at Moderate when the evidence is ungraded.
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 assessing the maturity of a CTI programme, the user asks "how mature is our CTI?" / "what should we improve next?", or wants a benchmark against the five-level model across six dimensions.
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 report or article needs to be split into individual claims before it is graded, cited or used as evidence — the user asks "what does this report actually claim?", "split this into claims", "separate the facts from the judgements", or another skill needs a claim list. Turns one document into five to twelve atomic claims, each typed (observation, attribution, assessment, actor claim, victim disclosure) and anchored to the verbatim sentence it rests on, so every extraction can be checked against the source. Preserves the source's own hedging. Does not grade. Invoked by /quality-of-information-check; its output feeds /ach, /key-assumptions-check, /intelligence-writing, /writing-assessments and /threat-actor-profiling.
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 surfacing the assumptions underlying an analytical judgment, the user asks "what are we assuming?" / "are these assumptions still valid?", or before publishing a high-impact assessment. Standard SAT applied during major assessments.
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 code review checklist and methodology. Use when reviewing PRs, conducting code audits, or assessing code quality. Keywords: review, PR, code review, audit, assess, quality, check
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 Azure environment monthly report (Markdown + PowerPoint) from Azure Advisor and Cost Management API. Use when creating Advisor recommendations report, cost trend analysis, or security/reliability assessment for a customer subscription. Triggers on 'Advisor report', 'Azure monthly report', 'subscription report', 'Azure環境レポート', '簡易月次レポート'.
Run a Duck Critic producer-critic loop: you (main) keep producing the plan/code/tests and gate your own work at checkpoints with a different-model critic, revising until it passes. Use when asked for rubber duck, ラバーダック, 別モデルレビュー, second opinion, critic, or a different-model code review, design review, plan critique, or review by another model/agent harness. Not for readability refactoring or code cleanup alone.
Operate a reusable technical book manuscript workspace with writing structure, reader persona SSOT, review rules, and optional Markdown to Re:VIEW/PDF support. Use when organizing a book manuscript repo, defining or reviewing target readers, standardizing chapter/section files, setting writing/review agents, handling publisher proof comments, or assessing an existing writing workspace. Triggers on book writing workspace, reader persona, reader audience, 読者ペルソナ, persona SSOT, technical book project, 執筆ワークスペース, manuscript workflow, Re:VIEW workspace, proof PDF, annotated proof, publisher proof comments, 校正, 校正注釈, and 初校.
Prose quality checker for Quarto (.qmd) files, grounded in William Zinsser's *On Writing Well* (30th Anniversary Edition). Checks for clutter, weak verbs, hollow qualifiers, clichés, inflated academic voice, poor leads and endings, pronoun and tense inconsistency, and unclear explanation. Produces a structured markdown report organized by document section — never modifies the source file. Use when asked to improve prose quality, tighten writing, reduce clutter, or apply Zinsser's writing principles to a draft. For grammar and punctuation, use the proofread skill. For APSA style rules, use the apsa-style skill. Supports an optional output-file argument and an optional @sec-label argument to restrict checking to one section.
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 spiral of silence theory (Noelle-Neumann) to analyze how perceived opinion climate suppresses minority expression. Use this skill when the user needs to understand why certain viewpoints disappear from public discourse, evaluate the role of fear of isolation in opinion expression, or assess opinion climate dynamics — even if they say 'why are people afraid to speak up', 'silent majority', or 'social pressure on opinions'.".
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。
"Conduct a systematic literature review following the PRISMA framework with explicit search strategy, inclusion and exclusion criteria, quality assessment, and transparent synthesis. Use this skill when the user needs to design a reproducible literature search, apply PRISMA flow documentation, develop inclusion and exclusion criteria, assess study quality, or when they ask 'how do I do a systematic review', 'what is PRISMA', or 'how do I make my literature review reproducible'.".
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 the Efficient Market Hypothesis (Fama, 1970) to evaluate information incorporation in asset prices across weak, semi-strong, and strong forms. Use this skill when the user needs to assess market efficiency, determine if a trading strategy can generate abnormal returns, evaluate event studies, or when they ask 'can technical analysis work', 'does the market already know this', or 'is this anomaly exploitable'.".
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 the three-level framework of digital transformation — Digitization, Digitalization, and Digital Transformation — to diagnose and plan organizational change enabled by digital technologies. Use this skill when the user needs to assess an organization's digital maturity, distinguish between automating processes versus transforming business models, plan a DX roadmap, or when they ask 'where are we on digital transformation', 'is this digitization or real transformation', or 'how do we build a DX strategy'.".
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 the Fama-French three-factor model to decompose asset returns into market, size, and value factors. Use this skill when the user needs to explain cross-sectional return differences, evaluate fund performance beyond CAPM alpha, assess small-cap or value tilts in a portfolio, or when they ask 'why do small caps earn more', 'is value premium real', or 'what factors drive returns'.".
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 phenomenological methods including bracketing (epoche), lived experience inquiry, and Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) to uncover the essence of human experience. Use this skill when the user needs to study how people experience a phenomenon from the first-person perspective, apply Husserlian descriptive or Heideggerian interpretive phenomenology, conduct IPA with idiographic focus, or when they ask 'what is the lived experience of X', 'how do I bracket my assumptions', or 'how do I do IPA'.".
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 Bloom's revised taxonomy to classify learning objectives and design assessments across six cognitive levels. Use this skill when the user needs to write learning objectives at specific cognitive levels, align assessment with instructional goals, or evaluate curriculum for cognitive complexity distribution — even if they say 'how to write learning objectives', 'what level of thinking does this require', or 'higher-order thinking 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。
"Apply Porter's Five Forces framework to assess industry competitive dynamics and attractiveness. Use this skill when the user needs to analyze an industry's profitability structure, evaluate market entry barriers, assess supplier or buyer bargaining power, or understand competitive intensity — even if they say 'industry analysis' or 'is this market worth entering' without naming Porter's explicitly.".
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。
"Conduct SWOT analysis with TOWS matrix for strategic planning. Use this skill when the user needs to evaluate a company, product, or project by identifying strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, or wants to generate strategic options from internal and external factors. Also use when the user mentions competitive positioning, strategic assessment, or asks 'what are our advantages and risks', even without naming SWOT explicitly.".
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。
"Conduct FMEA to systematically identify, prioritize, and mitigate potential failure modes. Use this skill when the user needs to assess product or process risks, prioritize corrective actions, or build a risk register — even if they say 'failure mode analysis', 'risk assessment', 'what could go wrong', or 'RPN calculation'.".
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 Cpk process capability index to assess whether a process meets specification requirements. Use this skill when the user needs to evaluate process capability, compare processes, or determine if quality targets are achievable — even if they say 'can our process meet spec', 'process capability', or 'Cpk calculation'.".
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。