795 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
NIS2 Directive (EU 2022/2555) compliance for critical infrastructure entities, covering the 10 minimum security measures. Use for NIS2 compliance assessments, entity scope analysis, supply chain security, and incident reporting readiness.
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。
Data breach incident response with ENISA severity scoring, notification timelines, and compliance tracking. Use for breach assessment and response.
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 operational runbooks from codebase analysis covering deployment, incident response, scaling, and monitoring, with copy-paste commands and rollback steps. Use when bootstrapping ops docs, preparing for on-call, or post-incident.
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。
Orientação LGPD para operações de tratamento no Brasil. Cobre bases legais (Art. 7º e Art. 11), RIPD, incidentes (Arts. 48-49), direitos dos titulares (Art. 18) e transferências internacionais. Triggers: LGPD, RIPD, ANPD, proteção de dados, dados pessoais, consentimento, encarregado, DPO Brasil, incidente de dados, legítimo interesse.
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 DORA (Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 — Digital Operational Resilience Act) compliance advisor for EU financial entities. Use this skill whenever a user asks about DORA compliance, ICT risk management frameworks, ICT incident classification or reporting, threat-led penetration testing (TLPT), ICT third-party risk management, Register of Information, contractual provisions with ICT providers, ICT concentration risk, oversight of critical ICT third-party service providers (CTPPs), or any DORA RTS/ITS obligation. Also trigger for: "DORA gap analysis", "DORA readiness", "Art. 6 ICT risk framework", "Art. 17 incident reporting", "Art. 26 TLPT", "Art. 28 third-party policy", "Art. 30 contractual provisions", "Register of Information CIR 2024/2956", "critical TPSP designation", "DORA vs NIS2", "DORA simplified framework", or EBA/ESMA/EIOPA digital resilience guidance.
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 Knowledge Engine — authoritative regulatory Q&A grounded in 70 official EU source documents (including the 2026 Commission draft guidelines on Art. 6 high-risk classification — general principles, Annex I, Annex III). Answers any question about the AI Act with article-level citations from the full regulation text, Commission guidelines, EDPB/EDPS opinions, codes of practice, harmonised standards, FRIA guides, incident templates, and sector-specific guidance. This skill should be used when the user asks about the "EU AI Act", "AI Act regulation", "Regulation 2024/1689", "KI-Verordnung", asks to "explain an AI Act article", "what does Article X say", "AI Act requirements", "AI Act penalties", "AI Act timeline", "GPAI obligations", "high-risk AI", "prohibited AI practices", "AI Act and GDPR", "fundamental rights impact assessment", "AI Act standards", "AI Act national implementation", "AI literacy", "serious incident reporting", "Digital Omnibus", "AI regulatory sandbox", or any question about EU artificial intelligence regulation. Also triggers on German terms: "KI-Gesetz", "KI-Verordnung", "Hochrisiko-KI", "KI-Kompetenz", "Grundrechte-Folgenabschaetzung", "GPAI-Verhaltenskodex". For assessment workflows that produce a classification decision rather than a knowledge answer, offer to run a structured risk-tier classification in-session.
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。
Orientação completa sobre conformidade com regulamentações do Banco Central do Brasil: Resolução CMN nº 4.893/2021 (Política de Segurança Cibernética), Resolução BCB nº 85/2021 (GRSIC), Open Finance Brasil (Resoluções BCB nº 32/2020 e atualizações), e demais normas prudenciais do BACEN. Cobre elaboração e revisão de Política de Segurança Cibernética, Plano de Ação e Resposta a Incidentes (PARI), Gestão de Riscos de Serviços de Informação e Comunicação (GRSIC), consentimento e compartilhamento de dados no Open Finance, requisitos de API, gestão de terceiros (outsourcing) e sanções do BACEN. Triggers: Bacen, Banco Central, CMN 4.893, Resolução 4.893, segurança cibernética bancária, PARI, GRSIC, Open Finance, Open Banking, compartilhamento de dados financeiros, consentimento Open Finance, API financeira, outsourcing bancário, risco cibernético, incidente cibernético banco, LGPD financeira, fintech compliance, instituição financeira, DICT, Pix segurança.
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。
Weekdays. Checks every project in the inventory from the outside, records one dated observation per project, then reads the production log surfaces since its own cursor and groups every error into a fingerprint so a hundred sightings are one incident. It appends the health ledgers, writes the health digest, and cards the incidents that clear the threshold. It changes nothing, deploys nothing, and never rotates a key.
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。
Model-guided autonomous root-cause analysis over a UModel object-graph semantic layer. Use with `umodel-query` when diagnosing service degradation, SLO breach, latency/error spikes, incidents, outages, or questions like why a service is slow, degraded, erroring, or timing out. The skill guides evidence collection across object graph, metrics, logs, topology, runbooks, deployments, config changes, business traffic, and runtime capacity; it is especially useful for ruling out red herrings such as recent but unrelated deployments. Triggers: root cause, RCA, incident, SLO breach, outage, postmortem, latency spike, error spike, timeout, 根因分析, 故障排查, 告警定位, 为什么慢, SLO 击穿.
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 NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) and adjacent guidance to AI / ML systems — model lifecycle governance, fairness and bias evaluation, robustness, transparency, accountability, third-party model risk, monitoring for drift, and AI incident response. Broader than prompt-injection (which is the security slice). Use when the user mentions 'AI risk,' 'AI governance,' 'NIST AI RMF,' 'AI compliance,' 'ML governance,' 'model risk management,' 'AI fairness,' 'AI bias,' 'algorithmic accountability,' 'AI Bill of Rights,' 'EU AI Act,' 'AI transparency,' 'model card,' 'AI red team,' 'AI safety,' 'responsible AI,' 'model drift,' 'concept drift,' 'AI monitoring,' 'AI incident,' or needs to assess or govern an AI / ML system.
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。
Translate technical security work into the language of non-security audiences — board, executives, engineering, customer success, customers, legal, procurement, sales. Covers incident communication, post-mortem narrative, audit-findings-for-stakeholders, risk justification, security spend justification, and customer-facing breach disclosure. Use when the user mentions 'security comms,' 'communicate this finding,' 'explain to my boss,' 'board update,' 'executive summary,' 'incident communication,' 'breach notification,' 'customer disclosure,' 'security memo,' 'post-mortem narrative,' 'risk justification,' 'why this matters to the business,' 'translate this finding,' 'stakeholder update,' or has technical security work that needs to land with a non-security audience.
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 responding to or forensically investigating an incident — triage acquisition (Velociraptor/KAPE), Volatility 3 memory forensics, Chainsaw/Hayabusa EVTX timelining, anti-forensics detection, cloud IR, ransomware/ESXi response
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 AI-focused SRE incident response practices for LLM outages, degraded quality, runaway cost events, and safety regressions.
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。
Designs and executes tabletop breach simulation exercises for testing organizational breach response capabilities. Covers scenario creation with realistic inject timelines, participant role assignment, communication testing across internal and external channels, decision-point evaluation, and after-action report generation. Keywords: tabletop exercise, breach simulation, incident response testing, scenario design, after-action report.
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, audit, or implement application structured logging architecture from repository evidence. Use when a user asks whether or where to add logs, how to choose or migrate a logger, how to standardize events/fields/levels/redaction, how to add HTTP access or panic logs, or why production logs cannot answer an incident question. Do not use merely to tail platform logs or to design a full metrics, tracing, SLO, and incident-management program.
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。
Observability and SRE expert. Use when setting up monitoring, logging, tracing, defining SLOs, or managing incidents. Covers Prometheus, Grafana, OpenTelemetry, and incident response best practices.
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 analyzing failures, outages, incidents, or negative outcomes, conducting blameless postmortems, documenting root causes with 5 Whys or fishbone diagrams, identifying corrective actions with owners and timelines, learning from near-misses, establishing prevention strategies, or when user mentions postmortem, incident review, failure analysis, RCA, lessons learned, or after-action review.
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 or update a runbook for an operational scenario — an incident an alert fires for, a recurring scheduled task, or a known failure mode on a live service — using a consistent template. Use when writing, drafting, authoring, or updating a runbook for an alert, incident, on-call procedure, scheduled maintenance, or operational SOP. Applies a YAGNI preflight requiring the scenario to be real before producing the runbook. Does not produce feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not record architectural decisions — use architectural-decision-record. Does not create coding standards — use coding-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。
Write blameless incident postmortems with timeline reconstruction, root cause analysis, action items, and preventive measures
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。
Bootstrap a Claude-assisted on-call for this channel/repo: discover the available connectors, mine incident history into draft triage playbooks, interview the human for policy, validate against held-out incidents, and install the scheduled routines. Use when the user wants to "set up on-call", "bootstrap the on-call kit", "onboard this channel", or has just installed the oncall-kit plugin. Five gated phases — never run more than one phase per turn, and never activate anything before Phase 4 sign-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。
Better Stack (formerly Better Uptime + Logtail) is an observability platform that combines uptime monitoring, log management, incident response with on-call escalation, and status pages. Use when a user asks to set up uptime monitors or heartbeat monitoring for cron jobs, create escalation policies, send logs with @logtail/node or the Pino transport, manage Better Stack through its API or Terraform provider, or publish status page updates.
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。
DevOps 与站点可靠性工程 (SRE) — 平台 / 基础设施 / 可靠性工程师的认知操作系统, 覆盖软件交付 + 运维全生命周期 (CI/CD 与发布工程 trunk-based + 渐进式发布 canary/blue-green/feature flag + GitOps Argo CD/Flux / 基础设施即代码 Terraform/OpenTofu/Pulumi/Ansible + policy-as-code OPA / 容器与编排 Docker/Kubernetes + Helm/Kustomize + service mesh Istio/Linkerd / 可观测性 Prometheus + Loki + OpenTelemetry + Honeycomb + eBPF + RED/USE / SLO-SLI-error budget 与可靠性工程 Google SRE 学科 + 容量规划 + 优雅降级 / 事件管理与 on-call 事件指挥 + PagerDuty + runbook + 无指责复盘 + MTTR / 云平台与 FinOps AWS/GCP/Azure + 成本优化 + 弹性伸缩 / 平台工程与开发者体验 IDP + Backstage + golden path + Team Topologies / DevSecOps 与供应链安全 shift-left + SBOM + SLSA + sigstore + Vault / 韧性与混沌工程 fault injection + game day + 安全科学 / DORA 指标与工程效能 部署频率 + 变更前置时间 + 变更失败率 + Accelerate 研究 / 数据库与有状态运维 schema 迁移 + 备份容灾) — 不含 通用应用开发 / 纯云销售认证速成 / 'DevOps = 跑 Jenkins 的岗位' 窄化误解 / ITIL 工单文化传统运维 (旧范式仅做边界) / 把手工运维 ClickOps 当稳态 (是 toil, 本 skill 核心反模式) (DevOps & Site Reliability Engineering — the cognitive operating system of platform / infrastructure / reliability practitioners who own the full software delivery + operational lifecycle, covering (a) CI/CD & release engineering (build pipelines, trunk-based development, progressive delivery — canary / blue-green / feature flags, GitOps with Argo CD / Flux), (b) Infrastructure as Code (Terraform / OpenTofu, Pulumi, CloudFormation, Ansible, Crossplane — module design, state management, drift, policy-as-code OPA / Sentinel / Checkov), (c) containers & orchestration (Docker / OCI, Kubernetes — scheduling, networking CNI, storage CSI, operators / CRDs, Helm / Kustomize, service mesh Istio / Linkerd), (d) observability (the three pillars + beyond — metrics Prometheus / VictoriaMetrics, logs Loki / ELK, traces OpenTelemetry / Jaeger / Tempo, high-cardinality observability Honeycomb, eBPF, RED / USE methods, SLO-based alerting), (e) SLO / SLI / error budgets & reliability engineering (Google SRE discipline — service level objectives, error budget policy, toil budgets, capacity planning, load shedding, graceful degradation), (f) incident management & on-call (incident command, PagerDuty / Opsgenie, runbooks, blameless postmortems, MTTR / MTTD, error budget burn), (g) cloud platforms & FinOps (AWS / GCP / Azure well-architected, multi-region, cost optimization, autoscaling), (h) platform engineering & developer experience (internal developer platforms, Backstage, golden paths, self-service, Team Topologies), (i) DevSecOps & supply-chain security (shift-left, SAST / DAST, SBOM, SLSA, sigstore / cosign, secrets management Vault), (j) resilience & chaos engineering (chaos experiments, fault injection, game days, resilience engineering / safety science), (k) DORA metrics & engineering effectiveness (deployment frequency, lead time, change failure rate, MTTR, the Accelerate research), (l) databases & stateful operations (schema migrations, backups / DR, replication); NOT generic software development / app feature coding (是 平行学科, DevOps/SRE 关注 delivery + operability 不是 product feature), NOT pure cloud sales / certification cram without operational depth, NOT 'DevOps = a job title that runs Jenkins' 的窄化误解 (DevOps 是 文化 + 实践, SRE 是 Google 对 reliability 的工程化具体实现), NOT ITIL-heavy 传统运维 工单文化 (是 被 DevOps 取代的旧范式, 仅做边界标注), NOT manual ops / ClickOps as a steady state (是 toil, 本 skill 的核心反模式).) Master OS — automated mastery of DevOps & Site Reliability Engineering — the cognitive operating system of platform / infrastructure / reliability practitioners who own the full software delivery + operational lifecycle, covering (a) CI/CD & release engineering (build pipelines, trunk-based development, progressive delivery — canary / blue-green / feature flags, GitOps with Argo CD / Flux), (b) Infrastructure as Code (Terraform / OpenTofu, Pulumi, CloudFormation, Ansible, Crossplane — module design, state management, drift, policy-as-code OPA / Sentinel / Checkov), (c) containers & orchestration (Docker / OCI, Kubernetes — scheduling, networking CNI, storage CSI, operators / CRDs, He
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 error handling, structured logging, and observability with OpenTelemetry (traces, metrics, logs), error classification, recovery patterns (retry with jitter, circuit breaker, bulkhead, timeout), error budgets/SLOs with burn rate alerts, and production incident triage. Use when user asks to implement error handling, logging, monitoring, observability, OpenTelemetry, error boundaries, circuit breakers, retry logic, or SLO tracking. Do NOT use for incident runbooks (use runbook-gen), vendor-specific APM setup (Datadog, Sentry agent config), or K8s debugging.
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。
Designs or reviews logs, metrics, traces, alerts, correlation, dashboards, and diagnostic instrumentation so failures and performance changes can be detected and explained at component boundaries. Use for observability work, incident readiness, instrumentation, or production diagnostics. Not for fixing a specific incident before reproducing it or for adding noisy logging without an operational question.
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。