2,669 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Parses the Windows Amcache.hve registry hive with Eric Zimmerman's AmcacheParser and Timeline Explorer to extract evidence of program execution, application installation, and driver loading, including SHA-1 hash correlation with threat intel and timeline reconstruction. Use for Amcache forensics, program execution evidence gathering, or application compatibility cache investigations in DFIR work.
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。
Systematically evaluate cyber-campaign evidence to attribute an operation to a threat actor, using the Diamond Model and Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) to weigh infrastructure overlaps, TTP consistency, malware code similarity, and timing/language artifacts into confidence-weighted attribution assessments. Use when an incident investigation needs a defensible attribution confidence level.
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 Windows LNK shortcut files and Jump List artifacts with LECmd, JLECmd, and manual Shell Link Binary Format parsing to establish evidence of file access, program execution, and user activity that persists even after the target file is deleted. Use when investigating Windows user activity, reconstructing file-access or program-execution timelines, or examining recent/frequently-used file evidence in a forensic exam.
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。
Quality review of test files and evidence — goes beyond existence, evaluates assertion coverage. ADEQUATE/INCOMPLETE/MISSING/NOT ASSESSED per story.
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。
Run or inspect NemoClaw live E2E evidence. Routes requested local execution, trusted GitHub dispatch, and release-evidence inspection.
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。
Deep research agent skill. Use when the user needs thorough, scientific, truth-seeking research on any topic -- investigating claims, finding primary sources, synthesizing evidence, producing cited reports. Triggers on: 'research this', 'investigate', 'deep dive', 'find sources', 'what does the evidence say', 'literature review', 'fact check', 'analyze the research on', any request requiring multi-source investigation with citations.
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 for PUA/try-harder productivity coaching when the user expresses frustration, repeated failure, quality complaint, passive behavior, says retry/change approach/don't give up, asks for evidence/completion check/test before done, or wants Ding-style workplace reminders. Triggers include: try harder, stop giving up, figure it out, again??, why still failing, change approach, no evidence, run tests, done without proof, 换个方法, 再试试, 别摆烂, 别偷懒, 为什么还不行, 又错了, 证据呢, 没跑测试别说完成, 验收, 闭环, 自嗨, 置身钉外, 无招, 老板体感. Do not use for calm first-attempt requests.
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。
FLOW framework integration: evidence-led SEO using the Find → Leverage → Optimize → Win loop. Surfaces stage-specific AI prompts from the FLOW knowledge base (41 prompts, CC BY 4.0). Use when user says "FLOW", "FLOW framework", "seo flow", "evidence-led SEO", "find leverage optimize win", or wants stage-specific SEO prompts.
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。
Performs graph-assisted triage of a single security finding, SARIF result, weAudit annotation, suspicious function, or report excerpt using Trailmark reachability, entrypoint paths, taint, privilege-boundary, blast-radius, caller/callee, and neighborhood evidence. Use when deciding whether one candidate issue is reachable, prioritizing a finding before PoC work, preparing evidence for exploit validation, or checking whether a static-analysis result is actionable.
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。
Penetration test and red team report writing methodology. Covers executive summary structuring (risk-led narrative for non-technical readers), technical finding format (title, severity, affected scope, narrative, reproduction steps, impact, remediation, references), CVSS v3.1 / v4.0 scoring with vector justification, OWASP risk rating, evidence hygiene (redacting credentials, hashing client data, time-stamping every action), screenshot and PoC artifact management, finding chain narratives, scope/limitations/assumptions documentation, retest evidence and remediation tracking, deliverable formats (PDF, DOCX, HTML, JSON for SIEM ingestion), client-customer-deliverable separation, and common report mistakes (over-CVSSing, undermining the triager, missing the 'so what'). Use at the end of an engagement when authoring a deliverable, when restructuring a draft for executive readability, or when establishing a reusable report template for a consulting practice.
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。
Route broad or ambiguous life-sciences research requests to the right skills, normalize core entities, optionally parallelize independent evidence gathering with subagents when available, and synthesize a concise evidence-backed answer. Use when a user asks a general life-sciences question that could span multiple sources or analysis types.
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 whether structured data, query results, dashboards, or analytical evidence are trustworthy enough to use. Use when the task is to check data quality, reconcile conflicting sources or metric definitions, or decide whether evidence is safe to cite.
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。
Evidence-first pull request judge that reviews a PR and posts one consolidated GitHub review with inline comments via the gh CLI. Runs the repo's own deterministic checks first, researches current official docs before any claim about external libraries or APIs, then reviews correctness, security, structural quality (code judo, spaghetti growth, file-size limits), and AI slop including useless code comments. Every finding must carry evidence, every comment passes a deterministic noise gate before posting, and the verdict (APPROVE, COMMENT, REQUEST_CHANGES) is weighed by findings. Use when asked to review a PR, judge this PR, review this branch or diff before merge, run the-judge, "revise esse PR", "faca o code review", or "julgue esse PR". Do NOT use for reviewing prose or documents, fixing CI failures, resolving merge conflicts, writing the fix itself, or responding to review comments (use gh-address-comments).
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。
Autonomous senior-operator mode for AI agents that resolve tasks end to end without babysitting and never create new problems. The agent verifies every claim against real evidence (web search dated to the current month and year, the codebase, and available tools, MCPs, and CLIs); it never guesses, never fakes confidence, and never claims something is done without proof. It stays silent and keeps working, interrupting the user only on three stops, namely a destructive or irreversible action, a dead-end with no evidence after exhausting sources, or genuine ambiguity that changes the outcome. Output is short, literal, and human. Use when the user says "not-your-babysitter", "nanny mode", "work autonomously", "stop babysitting", or "no hand-holding", or wants an agent that solves problems on its own, especially hands-on engineering and operational tasks. Do not use when the user explicitly wants a tutorial, a verbose walkthrough, or open-ended brainstorming.
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。
Interact with Kleros Curate registries across Ethereum Mainnet, Gnosis Chain, and Sepolia. Use when the user mentions Curate, Light Curate/LightGeneralizedTCR/LGTCR, Stake Curate/PermanentGTCR/PGTCR, Scout, token-curated registry/TCR, token lists, address/CDN tags, Goldsky, MetaEvidence, Verify Your List, or Curate calls such as addItem, removeItem, challengeItem, challengeRequest, and fundAppeal. Covers registry discovery and queries; policy/schema inspection; submissions, removals, challenges, evidence, appeals, rewards, execution; factory deployment; and frontend verification on all three networks. Also trigger for registry/list operations paired with Kleros, arbitrator, dispute, juror, or PNK context, and whenever the user names or tests kleros-curate. Do NOT use for non-Kleros registries or generic IPFS uploads without Curate context; route standalone uploads to kleros-ipfs-upload.
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。
Run the local Claude Code learning path, record evidence, and schedule evidence-based reviews.
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。
Activation requires either supplied .NET coverage reports/percentages/line, branch, or condition metrics, or an explicit request to collect .NET coverage for analysis. USE FOR: interpreting that evidence, including Cobertura data, partial conditions, plateaus, target arithmetic, project-wide coverage-backed CRAP, and coverage-backed refactoring safety. Analyze supplied reports directly without rerunning tests or installing tools. DO NOT USE FOR: requests with neither coverage evidence nor explicit coverage-collection intent, including hypothetical change-survival questions (use test-gap-analysis); CRAP or refactoring safety for one named target (use crap-score); or requests owned by test-tagging, find-untested-sources, test-anti-patterns, run-tests, or code-testing.
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。
VS-Enhanced Evidence Quality Appraiser - Prevents Mode Collapse with context-adaptive quality assessment Enhanced VS 3-Phase process: Avoids automatic tool application, delivers research-specific evaluation strategies Use when: appraising study quality, assessing risk of bias, grading evidence Triggers: quality appraisal, RoB, GRADE, Newcastle-Ottawa, risk of bias, methodological quality
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。
Direct REST API access to UniProt. Protein searches, FASTA retrieval, ID mapping, Swiss-Prot/TrEMBL. For broader biological evidence lookup across databases, use bio-database-evidence. Use this for direct HTTP/REST work or UniProt-specific control.
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。
Local evidence retrieval (FlashRAG-style) for VCO/vibe: search protocols/config/skills docs and return citeable snippets with file+line anchors.
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。
Primary retained Python toolkit for molecular biology sequence work. Preferred for sequence manipulation, FASTA/FASTQ/GenBank parsing, Bio.Entrez, BLAST workflows, alignments, structures, and phylogenetics. For biological database evidence lookup, use bio-database-evidence. For single-cell workflows use scanpy. For direct literature REST API, use pubmed-database.
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。
MiCA compliance evidence and stablecoin risk scoring. Use when the user asks about stablecoin compliance, MiCA status, peg stability, or needs verifiable evidence for audit workflows.
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。
Exports sanitized metadata, parameters, reproducibility details, quality metrics, and optional review artifacts from Medical AI inference runs or evidence packs to MLflow. Use after inference, including NV-Generate runs; not for live training tracking, model registration, or clinical use.
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。
[omh] Completion claim tested by Jev: Jev done check: does the gathered evidence support the completion claim? It can only object. Use when the user says: jev-done-check, jev done check, ask jev if this is done, jev evidence 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。