「cer」の検索結果

Prepares a DRAFT data incident impact brief from the incident notes and data inventory the user provides: the timeline as stated, systems involved matched to the inventory, data categories held and evidenced as involved, people and record counts potentially affected with the source and method behind every figure, third parties, notification questions for legal and the data protection officer, and every UNKNOWN with the evidence that would settle it. No legal determination: it never states whether the incident is a reportable breach, whether notice is due, to whom or by when. Use when the user asks to "prepare the impact brief for this incident", "what data was involved", "how many people are affected", "map the incident to our data inventory" or "pull together what legal needs on the incident". Do not use for the blameless postmortem or root-cause timeline, use incident-postmortem-drafter 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。

Turns an access export (accounts, entitlements, grant and last-used dates per system) into a draft access review pack, one section per system owner: who has what, since when, anomalies to confirm and the decision each line needs, with a blank column for the owner's decision. Never decides, revokes or rates access. Use when the user asks to "prepare the access review pack", "split this entitlement export by system owner", "who has access to what in this system", "build the recertification pack from this export" or "draft the access attestation for the owners". Do not use for a single request for a tool or access, use software-request-review 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 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 Business Officer archetype, covering commercial model, partnerships, deal structure, market positioning, strategic fit and opportunity cost, and returns a DRAFT review with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, commercial risks and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CBO review", "pressure-test this partnership", "check the deal structure" or "what would a commercial executive say about this". Do not use for pipeline, quota, sales-motion or forecast reviews, use cro-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, 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。

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 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 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 Financial Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, finance risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CFO review", "pressure-test the numbers in this business case", "what would a CFO say about this", "challenge the payback and run costs" or "prepare this for the investment committee". Do not use for delivery or capacity questions, use coo-reviewer instead; for architecture or vendor questions, use cto-reviewer; for positioning or demand, use cmo-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 Marketing Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings cited to specific passages, marketing risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CMO review", "pressure-test the positioning", "what would a CMO say about this", "challenge the launch plan" or "check the messaging and audience". Do not use for price economics, margins or payback, use cfo-reviewer instead; for sales pipeline mechanics, 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 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, 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。

Implement, debug and review code with focused checks. Use to fix a bug or failing test, refactor, remove code, perform a code review, or plan engineering work in repository records. Combine with UI for interface concerns and Plan for its native records. Excludes conceptual questions unrelated to a codebase.

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。

Resolve complex or high-impact problems when the cause, solution path, requirements, or proof boundary is genuinely uncertain. Use when work needs evidence-led diagnosis, consequential design or implementation, or a completion audit; do not trigger merely because work has multiple steps, or for simple facts, fully specified routine changes, or pure creative 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。

- 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。

- Enumerate an organisation's subdomains and sibling domains from Certificate Transparency logs and passive DNS, without sending traffic to the target. Use when looking for staging, dev, admin or VPN hosts, mapping the full hostname footprint of a domain, or spotting infrastructure a company forgot it had

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。

Extract bounded, source-linked context from large files or many inputs. Use when context is too large, files are oversized, or a task needs concise excerpts.

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。

Submission-grade remote-sensing Nature/high-impact journal figure workflow for Python or R. Use whenever the user asks to create, revise, audit, or polish manuscript figures, multi-panel scientific plots, map-led composites, remote-sensing image plates, sensor/product workflow figures, validation/error/uncertainty panels, or journal-ready SVG/PDF/TIFF outputs, especially for Nature-family, Remote Sensing of Environment, ISPRS, IEEE TGRS, or other high-impact venues. Before plotting, define the figure's conclusion, evidence logic, export needs, and review risks. If the user has not chosen Python or R, ask "Python or R?" and stop. Use only the selected backend for figure generation, previewing, exporting, and QA. Supports matplotlib/seaborn and ggplot2/patchwork/ComplexHeatmap. Not for dashboards or Illustrator/Figma-first infographics. Also trigger on general academic-writing figure needs even without the word "Nature", such as making figures/plots for a paper, scientific/academic plotting, data visualization for a manuscript, and Chinese phrasings like 遥感论文配图、学术写作配图、科研绘图、科研作图、地图出图、论文图表、可视化.

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。

Integracao completa com Amazon Alexa para criar skills de voz inteligentes, transformar Alexa em assistente com Claude como cerebro (projeto Auri) e integrar com AWS ecosystem (Lambda, DynamoDB, Polly

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。

Geracao de imagens humanizadas via Google AI Studio (Gemini). Fotos realistas estilo influencer ou educacional com iluminacao natural e imperfeicoes sutis.

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 cross-channel campaign data, quantify uncertainty, and propose evidence-labeled budget tests without overstating causality.

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 "find trending topics", "what trends should my brand jump on", or "time a campaign around a cultural moment"; produces a ranked trend report with brand-fit scores, format calls (rising/peak/declining), a cultural calendar, and go/skip recommendations. Not for finding the creators to run those trends — use influencer-discovery; not for building the brand posting calendar from a go verdict — use social-calendar-builder. 热点趋势洞察/借势营销

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 "set up my founder social-selling routine", "build a daily engagement block for target accounts", or "turn funding / hiring signals into selling plays"; produces the founder/seller daily operating block — a time-boxed engagement-block spec (substantive value-add comments on target-account posts, never a pitch), warm-touch-before-ask cadence rules, trigger-response plays consuming the social-pulse-monitor B2B trigger watchlist (funding / hiring / launch signals), and a quarterly diagnostic that reads LinkedIn SSI as an input diagnostic only (Estimated, vendor-defined — never a target metric). All volume norms are Estimated/community-derived; all execution is human — zero mass-DM, zero connection-request automation, zero engagement automation (LinkedIn UA §8.2 red line); 1:1 pitch and DM mechanics route to outreach-manager. Not for cold email sequences — use cold-outbound-sequencer. 社交销售/创始人日常互动块/热身触达节奏/触发信号剧本

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 "calculate influencer ROI", "prove campaign value", or "what was our ROAS"; produces direct ROI/ROAS, earned media value, attribution-modeled revenue, LTV-based ROI, and a stakeholder-ready summary. Not for building the full slide/written report — use report-generator. 达人营销ROI计算/投资回报测算

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。