「ai governance」の検索結果

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。

Expert NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) advisor covering all four functions: GOVERN, MAP, MEASURE, MANAGE. Use this skill whenever a user asks about NIST AI RMF, AI risk management, AI trustworthiness, GOVERN function, MAP function, MEASURE function, MANAGE function, AI RMF Playbook, AI risk profiles, responsible AI, AI bias management, AI transparency, AI explainability, AI reliability, AI safety, NIST AI 100-1, AI risk assessment, AI incident response, or alignment to EU AI Act, ISO 42001, or NIST CSF via AI RMF. Trigger even if the user doesn't say "skill" — any NIST AI RMF or AI governance risk question should use this skill.

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 ISO 42001 AI Management System (AIMS) compliance advisor. Use this skill whenever a user asks about ISO/IEC 42001:2023, AI governance, AI management systems, AI risk assessment, AI system impact assessment, Annex A controls for AI, Statement of Applicability for AI systems, AI policy, responsible AI, AI lifecycle management, AI incident management, AI transparency, AI bias, AI certification readiness, or any topic related to implementing or auditing an AI Management System. Also trigger for questions like "how do I become ISO 42001 certified?", "what controls does ISO 42001 require?", "how do I assess AI risk under 42001?", "what is an AIMS?", or any request involving organisational governance of AI systems, responsible AI frameworks, or AI regulatory compliance aligned to an ISO 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。

Expert NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) advisor covering all four functions: GOVERN, MAP, MEASURE, MANAGE. Use this skill whenever a user asks about NIST AI RMF, AI risk management, AI trustworthiness, GOVERN function, MAP function, MEASURE function, MANAGE function, AI RMF Playbook, AI risk profiles, responsible AI, AI bias management, AI transparency, AI explainability, AI reliability, AI safety, NIST AI 100-1, AI risk assessment, AI incident response, or alignment to EU AI Act, ISO 42001, or NIST CSF via AI RMF. Trigger even if the user doesn't say "skill" — any NIST AI RMF or AI governance risk question should use this skill.

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 ISO 42001 AI Management System (AIMS) compliance advisor. Use this skill whenever a user asks about ISO/IEC 42001:2023, AI governance, AI management systems, AI risk assessment, AI system impact assessment, Annex A controls for AI, Statement of Applicability for AI systems, AI policy, responsible AI, AI lifecycle management, AI incident management, AI transparency, AI bias, AI certification readiness, or any topic related to implementing or auditing an AI Management System. Also trigger for questions like "how do I become ISO 42001 certified?", "what controls does ISO 42001 require?", "how do I assess AI risk under 42001?", "what is an AIMS?", or any request involving organisational governance of AI systems, responsible AI frameworks, or AI regulatory compliance aligned to an ISO 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。

Marketing analytics and data-driven optimization for B2B SaaS campaigns. Use this skill when analyzing marketing performance, optimizing conversion rates, running A/B tests, conducting customer research, creating marketing dashboards, building attribution models, analyzing funnel metrics, or storytelling with data. Also triggers on: marketing ops, performance analytics, CRO, A/B testing, data storytelling, customer insights, tracking plan, event taxonomy, UTM taxonomy, GA4 audit, consent mode, instrumentation contract, sample size calculation, minimum detectable effect, test duration, not enough traffic to A/B test, statistical significance, Bayesian vs frequentist, sample ratio mismatch, experiment feasibility, martech stack, marketing tech stack audit, tool consolidation, build vs buy, vendor evaluation, shadow IT tools, ESP/CRM/platform migration, switching cost, cutover plan, suppression list migration, data portability, customer interviews, survey design, sampling frame, non-response bias, how many people should I interview, thematic saturation, voice of customer, jobs-to-be-done, buyer persona research, is this finding real, data enrichment, which enrichment provider should we buy, waterfall enrichment, contact data quality, match rate, our list data is bad, email verification, catch-all domain, accept-all, bounce rate from bad data, B2B data decay, how often should we re-verify contacts, ZoomInfo vs Apollo vs Clearbit evaluation, cost per usable record, where did this list come from, GDPR Article 14 notice, purchased list compliance, suppression screening, TAM list building, demand planning, marketing plan, how many leads do we need, what pipeline target should marketing carry, funnel model, top-down vs bottom-up plan, plan of record, annual marketing planning, quarterly planning, pipeline coverage we have to create, sales cycle lag, our leads cannot close this quarter, carry-in pipeline, scenario planning, conservative moderate aggressive forecast, stretch target, reforecast, re-forecast triggers, assumption register, capacity ceiling, addressable audience ceiling, marginal cost per lead, blended CPL is wrong, we missed plan and nobody knows why, AI policy for the marketing team, AI governance, AI acceptable use policy, which AI tools are we allowed to use, can I paste customer data into ChatGPT, shadow AI, AI use register, human review of AI output, when can we stop reviewing every AI draft, can the agent send on its own, the AI made a mistake now what, pull back AI autonomy, AI evals, our AI vendor changed the model, AI output went out wrong, prompt injection, can our AI read prospect replies safely, lethal trifecta, the AI leaked internal notes, turn off auto-generated ad assets, auto-applied recommendations, AI literacy training, EU AI Act Article 4, duplicate records in the CRM, dedupe before import, which value wins in a merge, CRM cleanup.

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 this skill when defining AI governance policies, designing human oversight workflows, documenting bias mitigation strategies, or meeting regulatory transparency requirements for Salesforce AI features. Trigger keywords: responsible AI, AI bias, AI audit trail, AI transparency, human-in-the-loop, AI risk inventory, AI disclosure. NOT for the MLOps pipeline or Policy-as-Code engine architecture — use architect/ai-governance-architecture. NOT for Trust Layer technical configuration — use agentforce/einstein-trust-layer.

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。

Chief AI Officer advisory for startups: model build-vs-buy decisions (API vs fine-tune vs in-house), AI risk classification under EU AI Act + US state patchwork, AI cost economics (API-to-self-hosted breakeven), and AI team org evolution. Use when deciding whether to call an API or fine-tune, classifying AI use cases for regulatory risk, calculating when self-hosting pays off, sequencing AI hires, or when user mentions CAIO, AI strategy, model selection, foundation model, fine-tuning, EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, AI governance, model risk, or AI economics. Strategic only — does not duplicate engineering AI/ML 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 the NIST AI Risk Management Framework (NIST AI 100-1 + the NIST AI 600-1 Generative AI Profile) to a specific AI system, governance question, or impact assessment. Three modes — consult, governance plan, full assessment — all cite Subcategories (`GOVERN 1.1`) and Profile Action IDs (`GV-1.2-001`) verbatim. Use when the user mentions the AI RMF, NIST RMF, NIST AI 100-1, NIST AI 600-1, GenAI Profile, the four functions (Govern / Map / Measure / Manage), the trustworthy AI characteristics, the 12 GAI risks (confabulation, harmful bias, information integrity, CBRN, data privacy, etc.), or asks "what does NIST say about X" for an AI 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。

Master the `agentbrain` CLI (npm package `agentbrain-cli`). Use this skill whenever the user runs, installs, configures, or asks about `agentbrain` commands; when they interact with the AgentBrain enterprise data hub — organizations, connectors, knowledge bases, workflows, media/documents, knowledge graph, permissions, LLM/prompt config, cost & usage, governance, audit logs; when uploading documents/files to AgentBrain (`agentbrain media upload`); when authenticating (login/logout/token/apiKey); when retrieving MCP context (`agentbrain retrieve-context`); when running SQL against a connector; when the user pastes any `agentbrain …` command; when they edit `~/.agentbrain/config.json`; or when they mention AgentBrain, agent-brain, agentbrain-cli, or the `.agentbrain` folder.

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。

AI compliance analysis for EU AI Act, ISO 42001, NIST AI RMF, GDPR, OECD, financial services regulations (SEC, FCA, FINRA, DORA, MiFID II), and other frameworks. Use when asked to generate a compliance checklist for an AI tool or use case, determine if a risk assessment is required, score an AI tool's risk level, identify where an AI tool or use case could run afoul of regulatory requirements, perform a gap analysis, recommend remediation steps, assess a vendor, draft an acceptable use policy, map training requirements, or review jurisdiction-specific AI rules. Triggers on phrases like "compliance checklist", "risk assessment", "risk score", "does this comply", "EU AI Act", "ISO 42001", "NIST AI RMF", "AI governance", "gap analysis", "vendor assessment", "acceptable use policy", "MNPI", "AI training requirements", or any request to evaluate an AI tool or use case for regulatory compliance or risk.

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 (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) compliance advisor — risk classification across all four tiers, all 9 prohibited practices (Art. 5, including the nudification/CSAM prohibition from Dec 2, 2026), all 8 Annex III high-risk use case areas, provider and deployer obligations (Arts. 9–17, 26), GPAI model obligations including the July 2025 Code of Practice (Arts. 51–55), conformity assessment and CE marking (Arts. 43–48), EU AI database registration, Art. 50 transparency (chatbots, synthetic media, AI-generated content), governance (AI Office, AI Board), penalties (Art. 99), confirmed phase-in timeline (Digital Omnibus, Reg. (EU) 2026/1744, in force July 27, 2026: Annex III deferred to Dec 2, 2027; Annex I to Aug 2, 2028), and cross-framework mapping to ISO 42001, NIST AI RMF, and GDPR. Use for any EU AI regulation, AI system classification, or AI compliance question. Current as of August 2026. GPAI enforcement powers active since August 2, 2026.

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 (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) compliance advisor — risk classification across all four tiers, all 9 prohibited practices (Art. 5, including the nudification/CSAM prohibition from Dec 2, 2026), all 8 Annex III high-risk use case areas, provider and deployer obligations (Arts. 9–17, 26), GPAI model obligations including the July 2025 Code of Practice (Arts. 51–55), conformity assessment and CE marking (Arts. 43–48), EU AI database registration, Art. 50 transparency (chatbots, synthetic media, AI-generated content), governance (AI Office, AI Board), penalties (Art. 99), confirmed phase-in timeline (Digital Omnibus adopted June 29, 2026: Annex III deferred to Dec 2, 2027; Annex I to Aug 2, 2028), and cross-framework mapping to ISO 42001, NIST AI RMF, and GDPR. Use for any EU AI regulation, AI system classification, or AI compliance question. Current as of July 2026. GPAI enforcement powers activate August 2, 2026.

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。

Review vendor AI terms — agreement, addendum, or ToS AI provisions — against your governance positions; flag training-on-data, liability, model changes, and AI policy consistency. Use when user says "review this AI agreement", "check OpenAI terms", "what did we agree to with [vendor]", "vendor sent an AI addendum", "is this AI contract okay", or attaches vendor AI terms.

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 this skill when the user wants an AI governance, legal-risk, privacy, compliance, procurement, or vendor-risk review of an internal AI use case, an AI product feature, an LLM workflow, or a third-party AI vendor. The skill asks intake and clarifying questions first when facts or evidence are missing, identifies required documentation and missing evidence, maps the use case to AI governance frameworks and applicable legal domains, and produces a preliminary or final governance review with scorecards, findings, owners, remediation actions, and follow-up questions.

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。

ISO 42001 AI Management System (AIMS) compliance. Use for ISO 42001 readiness assessments, AI governance planning, AI impact assessments, Annex A control validation, responsible AI implementation, and AIMS certification preparation.

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。

Redpanda's Agentic Data Plane: governance infrastructure for building, running, and governing AI agents and MCP servers, plus a proxying AI Gateway for LLM providers, operated via `rpk ai` and the ADP API. Use when creating or managing AI agents (managed or self-managed) via `rpk ai agent` or `AgentRegistryService`; configuring MCP servers (remote or managed catalog, code mode, auth); setting up LLM providers or querying models via `rpk ai llm`/`rpk ai model` or the AI Gateway proxy; or configuring budgets, guardrails, or Cedar access-control policies through the governance APIs. Also covers reading agent transcripts and spending insights, and wiring OAuth clients or providers to the aigw Authorization Server. For the separate rpk cloud mcp control-plane MCP server, see `/redpanda:rpk-cloud`.

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。

AI 治理法律顾问。负责 AI 用例分类、AI 影响评估、供应商 AI 条款审查、AI 清单维护、AI 政策制定与差距分析。当企业法务主理人（法衡中）调度执行 AI 治理相关任务时激活。典型问题：对此 AI 用例进行分类；起草 AI 影响评估；审查供应商 AI 条款。

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。

Knowledge base from NASA-STD-8729.1A — NASA's R&M (Reliability and Maintainability) standard covering spaceflight and support systems (Revision A, 2017-06-13). Use for NASA's objectives-driven R&M framework — the R&M objectives hierarchy (one Top Objective decomposed into four sub-objectives, paired with tailorable strategies), how R&M requirements are established inside the SMA Plan required by NPR 7120.5, the SMA Technical Authority concurrence/independent-evaluation governance, milestone vs. readiness review gates, the reliability/maintainability/availability vocabulary (Ai vs. Ao, the failure causal chain, risk as a triplet), and the R&M Evidentiary Methods catalogue (FMEA/FMECA, FTA, RBDA, RCM, LORA, plus the space-environment and parts-pedigree analyses). Scoped to NASA spaceflight and support systems and to assurance planning: it is an objectives-and-strategies standard, so it deliberately does NOT prescribe step-by-step analysis procedures (those live in the referenced NASA Preferred Reliability Practices) and is thin on facility R&M, detailed math/derivations, and non-NASA or commercial life cycles.

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 cold-start interview — learns your AI governance practice and writes `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/ai-governance-legal/CLAUDE.md` from your AI policy, a reference impact assessment, and key vendor AI agreements. Use when the practice profile is missing or contains `[PLACEHOLDER]` markers, or when user says "set up ai governance plugin", "onboard me", "configure ai governance".

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。

Configure Azure API Management as an AI Gateway for AI models, MCP tools, and agents. WHEN: semantic caching, token limit, content safety, load balancing, AI model governance, MCP rate limiting, jailbreak detection, add Azure OpenAI backend, add AI Foundry model, test AI gateway, LLM policies, configure AI backend, token metrics, AI cost control, convert API to MCP, import OpenAPI to gateway.

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。

Configure Azure API Management as an AI Gateway for AI models, MCP tools, and agents. WHEN: semantic caching, token limit, content safety, load balancing, AI model governance, MCP rate limiting, jailbreak detection, add Azure OpenAI backend, add AI Foundry model, test AI gateway, LLM policies, configure AI backend, token metrics, AI cost control, convert API to MCP, import OpenAPI to gateway.

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 (Regulation EU 2024/1689) compliance specialist. Use for AI system risk classification, provider/deployer obligations, GPAI model compliance, conformity assessments, bias and fairness testing, and AI governance programs.

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。

AI leadership advisor on AI strategy, governance, risk, investment, and org design. Use when defining an AI strategy, building an AI governance program, scoring AI maturity, or drafting an AI risk register.

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。