「rfc」の検索結果

大きな機能の設計提案を、依存関係と合格条件を持つ作業単位に分け、複数エージェントの調査・実装・テスト・レビューから統合と最終検証まで整理するスキル。

• 大きな設計提案を検証可能な作業に分けたいとき
• 複数エージェントへの依存関係付き作業割り当て
• 変更ブランチのレビューと順次統合

Review an Incan RFC document for formatting, structural, and content issues before GitHub submission. Use when the user asks to review an RFC, check an RFC for problems, prepare an RFC for submission, or says /review-rfc.

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。

Workflow for creating, updating, or superseding RFCs in Luma. Use when the task involves opening a new RFC, updating RFC status, marking an RFC as superseded or implemented, or deciding whether a change needs an RFC at all.

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 OpenShell RFC proposals in rfc/ from a design request. Use when the user asks to write, draft, start, create, or update an RFC, Request for Comments, architecture proposal, API proposal, process proposal, or cross-cutting design proposal that should follow the OpenShell RFC process and template.

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。

Break the PRD into sequenced implementation RFCs under RFCs/ with an RFCS.md index, then cold-read each RFC for 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。

Write well-structured RFCs with normative clauses. Use when: (1) Creating a new RFC, (2) Adding or editing RFC clauses, (3) User mentions RFC, specification, or normative requirements

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。

Creates structured Request for Comments (RFC) documents for proposing and deciding on significant changes. Use when the user says "write an RFC", "create a proposal", "I need to propose a change", "draft an RFC", "document a decision", or needs stakeholder alignment before making a major technical or process decision. Do NOT use for TDDs/implementation docs (use technical-design-doc-creator instead), README files, or general documentation.

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。

Transition an Incan RFC from one status to the next. Use when the user asks to promote, advance, or finalize an RFC, or says /bump-rfc. Handles Draft → Planned, Planned → In Progress, and In Progress → Implemented transitions.

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。

Manage architecture RFCs: create, review, list, update, and transition status. Use when user mentions "RFC", "technical proposal", "architecture proposal", or wants to draft, review, list, update, or change status of RFCs.

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。

Determine if proposed changes require an RFC. Use when planning significant changes, before starting major work, or when asked whether an RFC is needed.

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。

Record a decision, document existing code, or file a supplied research material. Modes: document decision (ADR, RFC, or rule), document code (spec, doc, guide, or scenario for existing behavior), document research (only when a finished report or one external material is already in hand). Use for 'we decided', 'record this decision', 'document why we chose X', 'make it our standard', 'draft an RFC', 'should we switch to Y' proposals, 'resolve the RFC', 'we accepted the proposal', 'document the auth module', 'capture how the payment system works', reference material, how-to instructions, or a user flow with examples over an existing spec. Name the type inside the subject to skip the type question. Planning a feature or an intended user journey → /archcore:plan. Checking docs against code or docs health → /archcore: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。

Record a decision, document existing code, or file a supplied research material. Modes: document decision (ADR, RFC, or rule), document code (spec, doc, guide, or scenario for existing behavior), document research (only when a finished report or one external material is already in hand). Use for 'we decided', 'record this decision', 'document why we chose X', 'make it our standard', 'draft an RFC', 'should we switch to Y' proposals, 'resolve the RFC', 'we accepted the proposal', 'document the auth module', 'capture how the payment system works', reference material, how-to instructions, or a user flow with examples over an existing spec. Name any document type inside the subject — journey, prd, idea, or cpat included — to get exactly that type. Planning a feature or an unnamed intended user journey → /archcore:plan. Checking docs against code or docs health → /archcore: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。

Audit and improve website readiness for AI agents using the Cloudflare "Is It Agent Ready?" scanner (isitagentready.com). Covers scanning via API, interpreting results, generating implementation prompts, and fixing every check. Use when the user mentions "agent ready", "isitagentready", "AI agent scan", "agent readiness", "agent-ready score", "MCP server card", "agent skills index", "markdown for agents", "content signals", "web bot auth", "agent discovery", "RFC 9727", "RFC 8288", "RFC 9728", "SEP-1649", "WebMCP", "ARD", "ai-catalog", "x402", "UCP", "ACP", or wants to make a website discoverable and usable by AI agents.

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。

Draft a new RFC document for the Incan language project. Use when the user asks to write, create, or draft an RFC, or wants to propose a new language feature or infrastructure change for Incan.

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。

Designing HTTP cache headers that work correctly across browsers, CDNs, and shared proxies — `Cache-Control` directives per RFC 9111, `stale-while-revalidate` and `stale-if-error` per RFC 5861, the Vary header for varying responses, and surrogate keys for tag-based purging. Grounded in IETF RFCs and Cloudflare/Fastly docs.

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。

Choosing and operating an HTTP API versioning strategy that doesn't break clients — Stripe's date-based pinned versions, the Deprecation/Sunset header pair (RFC 9745 + RFC 8594), URI vs header vs media-type approaches, and the version-transformer pattern. Grounded in Stripe's published architecture and IETF RFCs.

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。

Audit and improve website readiness for AI agents using the Cloudflare "Is It Agent Ready?" scanner (isitagentready.com). Covers scanning via API, interpreting results, generating implementation prompts, and fixing every check. Use when the user mentions "agent ready", "isitagentready", "AI agent scan", "agent readiness", "agent-ready score", "MCP server card", "agent skills index", "markdown for agents", "content signals", "web bot auth", "agent discovery", "RFC 9727", "RFC 8288", "RFC 9728", "SEP-1649", "WebMCP", "x402", "UCP", "ACP", or wants to make a website discoverable and usable by AI agents.

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。

RFCドリブンのマルチエージェントDAG実行パターン。品質ゲート、マージキュー、ワークユニットオーケストレーションを含む。

Designing HTTP cache headers that work correctly across browsers, CDNs, and shared proxies — `Cache-Control` directives per RFC 9111, `stale-while-revalidate` and `stale-if-error` per RFC 5861, the Vary header for varying responses, and surrogate keys for tag-based purging. Grounded in IETF RFCs and Cloudflare/Fastly docs. NOT for service-worker or browser-only caching, Redis/memcached application caching, or edge-function compute.

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。

Choosing and operating an HTTP API versioning strategy that doesn't break clients — Stripe's date-based pinned versions, the Deprecation/Sunset header pair (RFC 9745 + RFC 8594), URI vs header vs media-type approaches, and the version-transformer pattern. Grounded in Stripe's published architecture and IETF RFCs. NOT for GraphQL schema evolution, gRPC/Protobuf wire compatibility, database schema migrations, or library/SDK semver.

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 whenever the user mentions IP geolocation feeds, RFC 8805, geofeeds, or wants help creating, tuning, validating, or publishing a self-published IP geolocation feed in CSV format. Intended user audience is a network operator, ISP, mobile carrier, cloud provider, hosting company, IXP, or satellite provider asking about IP geolocation accuracy, or geofeed authoring best practices. Helps create, refine, and improve CSV-format IP geolocation feeds with opinionated recommendations beyond RFC 8805 compliance. Do NOT use for private or internal IP address management — applies only to publicly routable IP addresses.

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。

Monitors Certificate Transparency (CT) logs to detect unauthorized certificate issuance, discover subdomains via CT data, and alert on suspicious certificate activity for owned domains. Uses the crt.sh API and direct CT log querying based on RFC 6962 to build continuous monitoring pipelines that catch rogue certificates, track CA behavior, and map the external attack surface. Activates for requests involving certificate transparency monitoring, CT log auditing, subdomain discovery via certificates, or certificate issuance alerting.

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。

Extracts protocol message flow from source code, RFCs, academic papers, pseudocode, informal prose, ProVerif (.pv), or Tamarin (.spthy) models and generates Mermaid sequenceDiagrams with cryptographic annotations. Use when diagramming a crypto protocol, visualizing a handshake or key exchange flow, extracting message flow from a spec or RFC, diagramming a ProVerif or Tamarin model, or drawing sequence diagrams for TLS, Noise, Signal, X3DH, Double Ratchet, FROST, DH, or ECDH protocols.

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。

Frame a new design proposal (RFC-shape) under proposals/ — problem before solution, named beneficiary and observable change, real alternatives, honest drawbacks, and a live open-questions backlog. Read when asked to frame a proposal, write an RFC, propose a design, pitch a change, draft a PRD-style design doc, or open a design proposal for review. Do NOT read to record a decision after it is accepted (use record-a-decision), to write an implementation spec (use write-a-spec), to write a postmortem (use write-a-postmortem), or to review or critique an existing design (use review-a-design).

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。