「debrief」の検索結果

Structure and run a post-interview candidate debrief. Use when the user says "run the debrief", "how do we decide on this candidate", "let's calibrate", "we need to make a hire/no-hire call", "prep the debrief meeting", or wants to structure the decision-making process after interviews are complete - even if they don't explicitly say "debrief". Also use when a recruiter wants to prevent groupthink or HiPPO effect (highest paid person's opinion) from dominating the decision.

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。

Post-meeting debrief — analyzes what happened, compares outcomes to your prep intentions, tracks decision evolution. Use when the user says "debrief", "what just happened in that meeting", "what did we decide", "debrief that call", "post-meeting", "what changed", or right after stopping a recording.

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。

Synthesize pilot observations into structured debrief reports and spec updates. Use this skill when: - A pilot has completed and you have observation notes, tickets, or feedback transcripts - You need to turn messy pilot data into actionable spec changes - You want to generate edge case user stories from field observations - You need negative acceptance criteria from pilot bugs - You want a structured debrief report for stakeholder communication

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。

Prepares the user for a specific interview from their real experience. Builds a story bank in Situation/Task/Action/Result/Reflection form mapped to the competencies the role and company test (such as Amazon's Leadership Principles), writes a cited company and role brief from public sources, predicts questions per round, drafts opener, why-us, weakness and salary answers, prepares questions to ask and a logistics checklist, and runs a post-interview debrief. Use when the user says "help me prepare for my interview", "I have an interview tomorrow" or "in 2 hours", "build my story bank", "STAR stories", "interviewing as a career changer", "what will they ask me", "how do I answer tell me about yourself", "questions to ask the interviewer", "research the company" or "debrief my interview". Uses Reactive Resume MCP tools when connected. For scored role-play practice, mock-interview; for thank-you notes and tracking, job-application-manager; for a salary number, offers or negotiation, offer-negotiation.

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。

Plan, scope, and execute an authorized red-team engagement — distinct from a penetration test. Covers engagement methodology, assumed-breach scenarios, ATT&CK emulation plans, rules of engagement, deconfliction with the blue team, post-engagement debriefs, and the program-level work that makes red teams actually improve defenses. Use when the user mentions 'red team,' 'red team engagement,' 'red teaming,' 'adversary emulation,' 'ATT&CK emulation,' 'assumed breach,' 'purple team exercise,' 'tabletop with technical execution,' 'red team scope,' 'rules of engagement,' 'red team RoE,' 'deconfliction,' 'red team debrief,' or wants to design or run a red-team engagement against systems with authorization.

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 mock interview for a specific job description. Plays the interviewer in a chosen round (recruiter screen, hiring manager, behavioral, coding, system design, case, product sense, panel), persona and difficulty; asks one question at a time, probes vague answers, and gives quote-backed rubric scores after each answer (coach mode) or at the end (realistic). Model answers use only the user's real experience. Use when the user says "mock interview me", "interview me for this job", "practice interview", "pretend you're the interviewer", "grill me for this role", "run a behavioral round", "quick recruiter screen", "hiring-manager mock", "system design mock" or "case interview practice". With Reactive Resume MCP it reads the application and stories and logs the session. For a story bank, company brief, questions to ask or a real-interview debrief, interview-prep; for scheduling or thank-you notes, job-application-manager; for fixing the resume, resume-tailor; for negotiation practice, offer-negotiation.

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。

Interprets Culture Index (CI) surveys, behavioral profiles, and personality assessment data. Supports individual profile interpretation, team composition analysis (gas/brake/glue), burnout detection, profile comparison, hiring profiles, manager coaching, interview transcript analysis for trait prediction, candidate debrief, onboarding planning, and conflict mediation. Accepts extracted JSON or PDF input via OpenCV extraction script. Use when the user shares a Culture Index PDF or JSON profile, asks what someone's CI traits mean, compares Culture Index profiles across a team or against a hiring profile, or asks about burnout risk from Survey-versus-Job gaps.

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。

Comprehensive red team operations methodology covering full engagement lifecycle from planning through reporting. Addresses engagement scoping and rules of engagement negotiation, multi-tier C2 infrastructure design with redirectors and domain fronting, malleable traffic profiles and beacon tradecraft, OPSEC discipline including attribution avoidance and indicator management, EDR and AMSI evasion techniques using direct syscalls and unhooking, data collection with chain-of-custody controls, and structured reporting with purple team debrief workflows. Covers assumed-breach, external-to-internal, insider threat, and hybrid physical-cyber engagement scenarios with MITRE ATT&CK mapping throughout. Targets operators planning or executing adversary simulation engagements against mature defenders.

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] Company hiring or HR process to structure: turn hiring and people context into a fair, structured recruiting or people-operations brief. Use when the user says: recruiting plan, hiring scorecard, interview scorecard, candidate debrief, 채용 계획, 면접 평가표, 후보자 비교.

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。

Compatibility alias for Loopy. Use only when an existing installation or older instruction explicitly invokes loop-library; use Loopy for new installations and requests. Provides the same discovery, recommendation, audit, repair, adaptation, guided crafting, bounded execution, run debrief, project loop saving, and publication-preparation 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。

Discover, find, compare, audit, repair, adapt, craft, run, debrief, save, and prepare repeatable AI-agent loops for publication. Use when a user asks to analyze code or coding threads for recurring work, find a published loop, interview them to turn a goal into a bounded loop, review a loop for weak checks or unsafe authority, execute a loop with an evidence receipt, learn from completed runs, save or reuse a project loop, or validate and submit a loop to Loop Library.

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。

Stress-test a decision or claim through a sharp, fair Q&A — the questions a good lawyer or skeptical friend would ask before you commit. Use when asked to cross-examine me, ask me hard questions about this, interrogate my plan, or make me defend this. Produces a sequenced line of probing questions (from clarifying to challenging to the killer question), space to answer, and a debrief on where your answers were strong, evasive, or exposed a gap — so weaknesses surface in private before they surface in public.

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。

Turn interview notes into a structured candidate scorecard and hire recommendation. Use when asked to write an interview scorecard, a candidate evaluation, an interview debrief, or to summarize feedback into a hire/no-hire call. Produces a per-competency assessment with evidence and ratings, an overall recommendation with confidence, and the open questions for the next round — evidence-based, bias-aware, and decision-ready.

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。

Simulate the acquirer's diligence team hunting for reasons to cut your price — their internal red-flags memo with a price-chip estimate per finding. Use when asked to red-team my company before a sale, how will an acquirer attack our valuation, pre-diligence audit, or what will DD find. Produces the acquirer's internal memo (revenue quality, key-person, tech debt, concentration, legal) and a debrief on which flags are fixable before a process.

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。

Turn meeting notes or a transcript into sourced decisions, changes and next actions. Use after a customer conversation; review consequential record updates before saving.

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。

Keeps the engagement record for client work. Use when they name a client or stakeholder. Use when they debrief a meeting or paste notes. Use when they ask what was agreed. Use when they run a POC, change the client's codebase, prove it on their staging, go live, or need evals before a model acts. Use when they prep a readout, when trust shifts, or they say @fde. Route and run the local fde CLI (or npx --yes fdeops). Never ask them to type commands. Not for ordinary code edits in an unbound repo.

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, structure, and recycle lessons from active and closed legal matters. Three modes: in-flight capture (triggered by scope changes, risk events, status updates — highest value), mid-matter review (phase gates or quarterly), and matter close retrospective (full structured findings). Lessons are formatted for immediate reuse, not filed and forgotten. Use when a risk materialises, a scope change lands, a phase completes, or a matter closes and you want to convert what happened into something useful for the next matter. Trigger on: 'capture a lesson', 'what did we learn', 'matter close', 'retrospective', 'lessons learned', 'what went wrong', 'what worked', 'phase gate review', 'debrief', 'extract the learning', 'close the matter', 'what should we do differently', 'pattern from this matter', 'improve the next one'.

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 structured reflection prompts for a specific teaching experience or professional learning challenge. Use when debriefing lessons, journaling, or preparing for coaching conversations.

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 campaign has ENDED and the team needs a structured retrospective — a scorecard against target, what worked, what did not, and why with evidence, surprises, process review, lessons written back into the playbook and Brand Hub, and action items with owners. Trigger on 'campaign retrospective', 'campaign retro', 'post-mortem', 'campaign debrief', 'what worked and what did not', 'the campaign is over, what did we learn'. Also use when a campaign underdelivered and the team is arguing about why. Not for — a periodic performance report, see `07-marketing-report-global`; diagnosing live numbers mid-flight, see `03-performance-eval-global`; the next period ads plan, see `57-next-ads-plan-global`.

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。

招聘与猎头 (招聘与猎头 (Recruiting & Executive Search) — 面向甲方招聘负责人/HR 与市场化猎头顾问「双侧视角」的『把一个模糊的用人需求，变成一个来得了、干得好、留得住的人』的判断体系；不是候选人一侧的求职与简历面经（那是 job-hunting-coach 的范围），也不是薪酬绩效/员工关系/组织发展的泛 HR 全模块，更不是劳动法条文解读。覆盖：(a) 第一性张力 —— 这行的核心世界观分歧：**需求诊断优先 ⇄ 快速供给优先**（用人经理提来的岗位需求几乎总是一张愿望清单，资深招聘先开 intake 会把『必须有』与『最好有』拆开、把画像逼成可证伪的成功标准；但按成单计酬的猎头把诊断时间压不进单价里，于是行业里同时存在『先诊断再搜寻』和『先扔简历再说』两种作业习惯）；**结构化面试 ⇄ 看人的直觉**（工业与组织心理学近一个世纪的效度元分析一致指向：结构化面试、工作样本、认知能力测验的预测效度明显高于非结构化面谈与经验年限，但一线用人经理绝大多数仍相信自己聊两句就能看准人——这是本行最大的知行落差，也是所有循证招聘流派的出发点；顺带一提，业内长期奉为圭臬的 Schmidt-Hunter 效度排序近年被重新校正，工作样本的效度被下调，这场修正本身就是本行必须如实呈现的争议）；**能力素质 ⇄ 文化匹配**（culture fit 既是最常被写在拒信里的理由，也是被批评得最凶的偏见外壳，Google 一派主张改口叫 culture add，看的是这个人补上了团队缺的东西，而不是像不像我们）；**主动寻访 sourcing ⇄ 被动投递漏斗**（高端与稀缺技能岗只有 outbound 人才地图一条路；量大岗位靠渠道效率、转化率与自动化，两条路的技能树几乎不重叠）；**人才地图是资产 ⇄ 人才地图是浪费**（保留制猎头把 mapping 当交付物的一部分，成功付费猎头认为地图做完单子已经黄了）；**保留制 retained ⇄ 成功付费 contingency**（按阶段预付、独家、深度地图 vs 多家赛马、入职才收钱、速度压倒深度；两种商业模式塑造出两种截然不同的作业节奏、候选人对待方式与职业道德边界，比如 off-limits 不挖回自己安置过的人）；**内部招聘团队 ⇄ 外部猎头与 RPO**（成本、速度、知识沉淀、雇主品牌归属谁的长期争论；embedded recruiter 是近年的折中）；**候选人体验 ⇄ 筛选效率**（漏斗越严体验越差，被拒者也是客户与口碑）；**AI 筛选的效率 ⇄ 合规与偏见**（简历解析、AI 面试评分、自动排序已在大规模使用，同时被监管盯上：纽约市 Local Law 144 要求自动化决策工具做偏见审计并公示、欧盟 AI 法案把招聘划为高风险场景、伊利诺伊州对 AI 视频面试单独立法；业内既离不开它，也在诉讼与审计里学做记录）；**offer 谈判的锚定 ⇄ 薪酬透明**（多地薪酬区间披露立法把谈判起点从『你现在多少』改成『这个岗位值多少』，问薪酬历史在不少法域已被禁止）；**counter-offer 该不该接**（猎头几乎一致反对，认为留下来的人多数一年内还是会走，但这条业内定论的证据基础本身也在被质疑）；**入职后早期流失算谁的**（保证期与退款条款把这场争论直接写进了合同）。(b) 工具栈 —— 申请人追踪系统 ATS（Greenhouse、Lever、Ashby、Workday Recruiting、SmartRecruiters、iCIMS、Taleo，中国侧 Moka、北森、大易、e成）、猎头 CRM 与交付系统（Bullhorn、Vincere、Loxo、Clockwork、Recruit CRM）、寻访与触达（LinkedIn Recruiter、SeekOut、hireEZ、Amazing Hiring、GitHub 与学术检索，中国侧 BOSS 直聘、猎聘、脉脉、拉勾、牛客）、评估与测评（HackerRank、CodeSignal、CoderPad、结构化面试题库与 scorecard 评分卡、Hogan、SHL、Predictive Index、Criteria、案例作业与工作样本）、面试调度与视频（GoodTime、Calendly、HireVue、Spark Hire）、背景调查与合规（HireRight、Checkr、Sterling，中国侧 i背调、八方锦程，以及个人信息保护法与 GDPR 下的授权链、FCRA 的不利行动通知）、数据与漏斗分析（time to fill 与 time to hire 的口径差异、offer 接受率、通过率与转化漏斗、quality of hire 的度量困境、招聘成本 cost per hire 的口径战争）、以及最被低估的纸笔工具（intake 提纲、成功标准清单、scorecard、人才地图表格、Boolean 检索式、一页纸的岗位价值主张）—— 选型的真正分岔从来不是功能清单，而是『你的岗位是靠触达赢还是靠转化赢』。(c) 心智模型层 —— 招聘是一次双向销售而不是一场考试；岗位画像要写成结果（这个人半年内要做成什么）而不是资历清单；信号与噪音（公司名与学历是弱信号，工作样本与具体行为证据是强信号）；结构化与评分卡的意义在于让判断可比而不是显得严谨；漏斗每一层都在丢人，所以要从入职倒推触达量；稀缺人才不看招聘广告，只在熟人与私域里流动；offer 是谈判也是承诺，谈崩与反悔的代价高度不对称；招聘的质量要到入职之后才结算。(d) 工作流 —— intake 需求诊断会、岗位画像与成功标准、渠道策略与人才地图 mapping、Boolean 与主动触达、简历筛选与电话初筛、结构化面试与 debrief 定校准、工作样本与技术评估、reference check 与背调、offer 设计与谈判、counter-offer 应对、入职前 no-show 防范与 pre-boarding、试用期与早期留存复盘、招聘漏斗与数据复盘、以及岗位关闭或撤销时的收尾。(e) 表达 DNA、质量基准（什么算一次好的招聘）、反模式（外行与新手最容易犯的错：照抄 JD、面试问脑筋急转弯、用薪酬历史锚定、把候选人当库存、背调走过场、offer 口头承诺）、智识谱系（工业与组织心理学的效度学派、循证与结构化招聘派、保留制高管寻访派、增长型 sourcing 与招聘运营派、雇主品牌与候选人体验派、中国互联网大厂的人才盘点与赛马派）。) Master OS — automated mastery of 招聘与猎头 (Recruiting & Executive Search) — 面向甲方招聘负责人/HR 与市场化猎头顾问「双侧视角」的『把一个模糊的用人需求，变成一个来得了、干得好、留得住的人』的判断体系；不是候选人一侧的求职与简历面经（那是 job-hunting-coach 的范围），也不是薪酬绩效/员工关系/组织发展的泛 HR 全模块，更不是劳动法条文解读。覆盖：(a) 第一性张力 —— 这行的核心世界观分歧：**需求诊断优先 ⇄ 快速供给优先**（用人经理提来的岗位需求几乎总是一张愿望清单，资深招聘先开 intake 会把『必须有』与『最好有』拆开、把画像逼成可证伪的成功标准；但按成单计酬的猎头把诊断时间压不进单价里，于是行业里同时存在『先诊断再搜寻』和『先扔简历再说』两种作业习惯）；**结构化面试 ⇄ 看人的直觉**（工业与组织心理学近一个世纪的效度元分析一致指向：结构化面试、工作样本、认知能力测验的预测效度明显高于非结构化面谈与经验年限，但一线用人经理绝大多数仍相信自己聊两句就能看准人——这是本行最大的知行落差，也是所有循证招聘流派的出发点；顺带一提，业内长期奉为圭臬的 Schmidt-Hunter 效度排序近年被重新校正，工作样本的效度被下调，这场修正本身就是本行必须如实呈现的争议）；**能力素质 ⇄ 文化匹配**（culture fit 既是最常被写在拒信里的理由，也是被批评得最凶的偏见外壳，Google 一派主张改口叫 culture add，看的是这个人补上了团队缺的东西，而不是像不像我们）；**主动寻访 sourcing ⇄ 被动投递漏斗**（高端与稀缺技能岗只有 outbound 人才地图一条路；量大岗位靠渠道效率、转化率与自动化，两条路的技能树几乎不重叠）；**人才地图是资产 ⇄ 人才地图是浪费**（保留制猎头把 mapping 当交付物的一部分，成功付费猎头认为地图做完单子已经黄了）；**保留制 retained ⇄ 成功付费 contingency**（按阶段预付、独家、深度地图 vs 多家赛马、入职才收钱、速度压倒深度；两种商业模式塑造出两种截然不同的作业节奏、候选人对待方式与职业道德边界，比如 off-limits 不挖回自己安置过的人）；**内部招聘团队 ⇄ 外部猎头与 RPO**（成本、速度、知识沉淀、雇主品牌归属谁的长期争论；embedded recruiter 是近年的折中）；**候选人体验 ⇄ 筛选效率**（漏斗越严体验越差，被拒者也是客户与口碑）；**AI 筛选的效率 ⇄ 合规与偏见**（简历解析、AI 面试评分、自动排序已在大规模使用，同时被监管盯上：纽约市 Local Law 144 要求自动化决策工具做偏见审计并公示、欧盟 AI 法案把招聘划为高风险场景、伊利诺伊州对 AI 视频面试单独立法；业内既离不开它，也在诉讼与审计里学做记录）；**offer 谈判的锚定 ⇄ 薪酬透明**（多地

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 structured reflection prompts for a specific teaching experience or professional learning challenge. Use when debriefing lessons, journaling, or preparing for coaching conversations.

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。

Head-to-Head Candidate Comparison — two candidates side-by-side across skills, experience, culture fit, salary expectations, references, hire-or-no-hire recommendation

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。

Structure and prepare for a sales discovery call. Use when the user says "prep for discovery call", "discovery call questions", "how to structure my discovery call", "first call with a prospect", "what to ask on a discovery call", "sales call prep", "plan my discovery call", "initial call framework", or wants to prepare for or debrief a first sales conversation.

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 user research interview scripts using Mom Test principles. Use this skill when: - You are preparing for user interviews or pilot observation sessions - You need a question bank organized by behavior, context, pain points, and workflow - You want interview guides that avoid leading questions and hypotheticals - You need per-persona interview guides - You are preparing for field visits or pilot debriefs

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。