「how」の検索結果

Comprehensive Linux privilege escalation methodology for offensive security engagements. Covers the full attack surface from a low-privilege shell to root: SUID/SGID binary abuse via GTFOBins, Linux capabilities exploitation (cap_setuid, cap_dac_override, cap_dac_read_search), sudo misconfigurations including NOPASSWD rules and Baron Samedit (CVE-2021-3156), cron job abuse through writable scripts, PATH hijacking, and wildcard injection with tar/rsync/chown. Includes writable /etc/passwd attacks, NFS no_root_squash exploitation, kernel exploits (DirtyPipe CVE-2022-0847, DirtyCow CVE-2016-5195, PwnKit CVE-2021-4034), Docker group container escapes, LD_PRELOAD and LD_LIBRARY_PATH hijacking for shared library injection, systemd service misconfigurations, and sensitive file enumeration for credential harvesting. Integrates automated enumeration with LinPEAS, linux-exploit-suggester, pspy for process monitoring, and GTFOBins for binary exploitation. Each technique includes detection signatures and defender-side visibility to support purple team operations. Maps to MITRE ATT&CK T1548 (Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism) and related sub-techniques. Designed for authorized penetration testing, red team engagements, and CTF competitions where you hold a low-privilege shell and need to escalate to root.

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 specific `rig` command, subcommand, or flag is already known and you need its exact syntax, JSON shape, defaults, or error meaning. NOT for natural capability discovery, open-ended how-do-I questions, or choosing which OpenRig move applies.

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 designing, reviewing, or debugging how an agent's context window gets filled, pruned, or shared — choosing what loads at boot versus on demand, sizing an install or an always-loaded file, fixing an agent that drifts, repeats itself, or forgets constraints mid-task, planning compaction or summarization, deciding single-agent versus subagents, engineering handoffs between agents, or picking a tool loadout. NOT for rewording a prompt's tone, choosing which model to pin, or debugging business logic — those are adjacent moments this skill does not serve. Historical 2024–2025 snapshot; not normative for present-day frontier models — see the Status 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。

Use when designing or auditing how an agent becomes useful after launch — AGENTS.md overlays, role files, skills, rig specs, workflow specs, startup checklists, refocus messages, "rig context" surface. Covers the 4 failure modes that make startup context fail (old rig spec misses current operating mode; current agents never told about new guidance; startup file as dumping ground; orchestrator transmits implementation without preserving product intent).

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 you do not know WHERE something belongs: you learned a lesson and are unsure which file takes it; you are about to create a new doc, folder, or convention; you are asking "should this be a skill, a note, or a chain file?"; you inherited a seat and want to know what SHOULD exist; or you are about to duplicate knowledge that already has a home. Also the trace-to-root: how a seat orients by reading one filename at each level from where it stands up to the fleet.

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 you have a task and must decide WHO does it — yourself, a spawned subagent, or another agent in the topology that already holds the context. The rule: how much would a blank slate have to read in to do this correctly? A lot → route to a context-holding agent; a little → subagent; unsure → a real agent or yourself. NOT the mechanics of fanning out (that's dispatching-parallel-agents / subagent-driven-development) — this is the who/whether decision, and the failure mode that makes teams abandon subagents.

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。

Help engineers evaluate a local skill or plugin, explain why it scored that way, show what to fix first, measure real token usage, benchmark starter scenarios, or decide what to run next. Use when the user says things like "evaluate this skill", "give me an analysis of the game dev skill", "why did this score that way", "what should I fix first", "measure the real token usage of this skill", or "what should I run next?".

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。

Capture conversations and decisions into structured Notion pages; use when turning chats/notes into wiki entries, how-tos, decisions, or FAQs with proper linking.

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。

Build or update a professional-grade design system in Figma from a codebase. Use when the user wants to create variables/tokens, build component libraries, create individual components with proper variant sets and variable bindings, set up theming (light/dark modes), document foundations, or reconcile gaps between code and Figma. Also use when the user asks to create or generate any component in Figma — even a single one — since components require proper variable foundations, variant states, and design token bindings to be production-quality. This skill teaches WHAT to build and in WHAT ORDER — it complements the `figma-use` skill which teaches HOW to call the Plugin API. Both skills should be loaded together.

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。

**MANDATORY prerequisite** — you MUST invoke this skill BEFORE calling the `get_design_context` Figma MCP tool. You MUST trigger this skill whenever the user wants to implement, build, port, or code up a Figma design as code. Example prompts (not exhaustive) are 'implement this Figma design', 'build this screen from Figma', 'turn this Figma into code', 'design to code'. This skill provides critical instructions and steps to the agent on how to correctly implement Figma designs in code and must NOT be skipped.

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。

Read a Canva design and return structured, actionable design feedback — visual hierarchy, copy/messaging, layout & spacing, consistency, readability, and accessibility. Read-only; makes no changes to the design. Use when the user asks to "review my design", "give me feedback on this", "critique my deck/poster/flyer", "how can I improve this design", or "what's wrong with this slide".

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 statistically honest and uncertainty-aware visualizations. Use when the user needs help showing distributions, intervals, confidence, missingness, sampling effects, or analytical rigor in charts and dashboards.

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。

Choose and apply automatic layout strategies for node-link diagrams and connected-node visuals. Use when the user asks how to auto-arrange nodes, reduce line crossings, route edges, avoid overlaps, stabilize layout, or choose graph-layout algorithms for network diagrams, dependency graphs, database schema diagrams, ERDs, state machines, decision trees, flow diagrams, box-and-line editors, or other line-connected nodes.

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 user wants to see their logo, design, or sketch on a product or scene mockup — mugs, t-shirts, business cards, hats, phone screens, posters, billboards, or similar. Triggers on "create mockups", "show my logo on products", or any logo upload with a request to visualize it on items. Access: 🔐 Signed-In required | Gen AI: ✅ Adobe Firefly via `image_generate` used for design creation, sketch polishing, and mockup scene 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。

Explains what Airtable is and how data is structured — bases, tables, fields, records, views, automations, and interfaces. Use when you need context about the Airtable data model.

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 a user-centered problem statement with who is blocked, what they are trying to do, why it matters, and how it feels. Use when framing discovery, prioritization, or a PRD.

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 six-frame storyboard that shows a user's journey from problem to solution. Use when you need a fast narrative for alignment, concept reviews, or demos.

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。

Scores how completely an implementation fulfills a PRD/spec, case by case, and produces a single comparable final grade. Invoke only when explicitly named (e.g. run spec-driven-eval); do not auto-trigger. Use when benchmarking spec-driven implementations, grading acceptance criteria, evaluating whether a feature was 100% implemented, comparing multiple implementations of the same PRD, or auditing implementation and test coverage (unit and e2e) against product requirements. Do NOT use for planning or building features (use tlc-spec-driven), writing PRDs, or general code review unrelated to a spec.

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。

Technology-agnostic guidance for modular systems: bounded contexts, clear boundaries, composability, state isolation, explicit contracts, failure containment, scaffolding workflows, split/merge criteria, sub-units inside a context, and compliance review signals. Use when designing or reviewing module structure, service boundaries, package layout, cross-cutting dependencies, "how should we split this?", modularity assessments, coupling between domains, greenfield context design, or architecture discussions without assuming a specific framework, language, or repository layout. Do NOT use for executing the full Patterns 1–5 repo decomposition pipeline or per-pattern inventories (use modular-decomposition), phased extraction roadmaps as the main deliverable (use decomposition-planning-roadmap), or end-to-end legacy migration strategy (use legacy-migration-planner).

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。

Runs a sequenced monolith-to-modular pipeline that sizes and inventories components, finds shared domain duplication, addresses flattening and hierarchy issues, analyzes coupling, then groups components into candidate domain-aligned units, with optional embedded DDD strategic analysis for bounded contexts. Use when asking how to split a monolith, size components before extraction, find duplicated domain logic, clean up module hierarchy, measure coupling between modules, or group components into services. Do NOT use for phased extraction roadmaps or prioritization without the prior analysis steps (use decomposition-planning-roadmap after this pipeline), end-to-end legacy migration strategy writeups (use legacy-migration-planner), pure infrastructure capacity sizing, or when you only need DDD without the structural pipeline (install domain-analysis standalone).

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 guide for designing and building high-quality skills from scratch through structured conversation. Use when someone wants to create a new skill, build a skill, design a skill, or asks for help making Agents do something consistently. Also use when someone says "turn this into a skill", "I want to automate this workflow", "how do I teach my Agent to do X", or mentions creating SKILL.md files. Covers standalone skills and MCP-enhanced workflows. Do NOT use for creating subagents (use subagent-creator) or technical design documents (use create-technical-design-doc).

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。

Your pathfinder for navigating unknown codebases. Investigates with precision, implements surgically, and never assumes — if it doesn't know, it says so. Maintains a .notebook/ knowledge base that grows across sessions, turning every discovery into lasting intelligence. Summons available skills, MCPs, and docs when the mission demands. Use when fixing bugs, implementing features, refactoring, investigating flows, or any development task in unfamiliar territory. Triggers on "fix this", "implement this", "how does this work", "investigate this flow", "help me with this code". Do NOT use for greenfield scaffolding, CI/CD, or infrastructure provisioning.

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。

Analyzes coupling between modules using the three-dimensional model (strength, distance, volatility) from "Balancing Coupling in Software Design". Use when asking "are these modules too coupled?", "show me dependencies", "analyze integration quality", "which modules should I decouple?", "coupling report", or evaluating architectural health. Do NOT use for domain boundary analysis (use domain-analysis) or component sizing (use component-identification-sizing).

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。

Maps architectural components in a codebase and measures their size to identify what should be extracted first. Use when asking "how big is each module?", "what components do I have?", "which service is too large?", "analyze codebase structure", "size my monolith", or planning where to start decomposing. Do NOT use for runtime performance sizing or infrastructure capacity 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。