007
無料Security audit, hardening, threat modeling (STRIDE/PASTA), Red/Blue Team, OWASP checks, code review, incident response, and infrastructure security for any project.
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。
ACGME regulatory compliance expertise for medical residency scheduling. Use when validating schedules, checking work hour limits, supervision ratios, or answering compliance questions. Integrates with MCP validation tools.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Expert knowledge of ACGME (Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education) requirements for residency program scheduling.
For ANY compliance validation, you MUST run:
# Step 1: Validate against ACGME rules
mcp__residency-scheduler__validate_schedule_tool(
start_date="[start]",
end_date="[end]",
check_work_hours=True,
check_supervision=True,
check_rest_periods=True,
check_consecutive_duty=True
)
# Step 2: Military compliance check (DRRS ratings)
mcp__residency-scheduler__check_mtf_compliance_tool(
check_circuit_breaker=True,
generate_sitrep=True
)
# Step 3: Query knowledge base for policy details
mcp__residency-scheduler__rag_search(
query="ACGME [specific rule]",
doc_type="acgme_rules"
)
These tools provide authoritative compliance data. Never rely on memory alone.
Requirement: Maximum 80 hours per week, averaged over 4-week period
Weekly Hours ≤ 80 (averaged over rolling 4 weeks)
| Calculation | Formula |
|---|---|
| 4-Week Average | (Week1 + Week2 + Week3 + Week4) / 4 |
| Warning Threshold | > 75 hours/week |
| Violation | > 80 hours/week average |
Common Violations:
Requirement: One 24-hour period free from duty every 7 days
Must have ≥ 1 day completely off per 7-day period
| Status | Definition |
|---|---|
| Compliant | 24+ continuous hours off in 7-day window |
| At Risk | 6 consecutive duty days |
| Violation | 7+ consecutive duty days |
Note: Averaged over 4 weeks for some programs
Requirement: Adequate faculty oversight based on training level
| Training Level | Max Residents per Faculty |
|---|---|
| PGY-1 (Intern) | 2:1 |
| PGY-2 | 4:1 |
| PGY-3+ | 4:1 |
Critical Areas Requiring Direct Supervision:
| Scenario | Maximum Duration |
|---|---|
| Standard shift | 24 hours |
| With strategic napping | 28 hours (rare exception) |
| Minimum time off between shifts | 8 hours |
| Extended (in-house call) | 24 + 4 hours transition |
Tool: validate_acgme_compliance
Purpose: Full compliance check against all rules
Returns: violations[], warnings[], compliant_areas[]
| Tool | Use Case |
|---|---|
get_schedule | Retrieve schedule data for analysis |
check_utilization_threshold_tool | Verify 80% utilization limit |
run_contingency_analysis_resilience_tool | Check N-1 coverage |
Step 1.1: Collect Schedule Data
# Use MCP tool to get current schedule
mcp call validate_acgme_compliance --schedule_id=current
Response includes:
Step 1.2: Extract Compliance Metrics For each resident:
Step 2.1: 80-Hour Rule Analysis
For each resident:
1. Calculate rolling 4-week average
= (Week-4 + Week-3 + Week-2 + Week-1) / 4
2. Compare to threshold:
- Compliant: < 80 hours/week average
- Warning: 75-80 hours/week average
- Violation: > 80 hours/week average
3. Identify problematic weeks:
- Which week(s) exceed limit?
- What assignments cause excess?
Step 2.2: 1-in-7 Rule Analysis
For each resident:
1. Look at each 7-day rolling window
2. Count continuous duty-free days
- Need at least one 24-hour period off
3. Identify violations:
- 7+ consecutive duty days = VIOLATION
- 6 consecutive duty days = WARNING
- Schedule relief needed by [DATE]
Step 2.3: Supervision Ratio Analysis
For each rotation with residents:
1. Count residents scheduled
2. Count faculty available on shift
3. Calculate ratio by training level
4. Compare to requirements:
- PGY-1: Must be ≤ 2:1
- PGY-2/3: Must be ≤ 4:1
4. Flag violations:
- Specific shift/date
- Gap count (how many too many)
- Recommended faculty additions
Step 2.4: Duty Period Analysis
For each assignment:
1. Calculate duty period duration
2. Check for adequate rest after:
- Post-24h call: minimum 8 hours off before next duty
- Extended (28h): minimum 10 hours off
3. Flag violations with specific dates
Step 3.1: Categorize Findings
| Severity | Criteria | Response Time |
|---|---|---|
| VIOLATION | Actual breach of rule | Immediate (today) |
| WARNING | Approaching threshold | 48 hours |
| AT RISK | Potential issue | Monitor, plan |
| COMPLIANT | Within all limits | Continue |
Step 3.2: Prioritize Issues
Ranking (highest to lowest priority):
1. Violations affecting resident health/safety
2. Systemic violations (recurring pattern)
3. Single-resident violations
4. Warning-level issues
5. At-risk scenarios
Step 4.1: Root Cause Analysis For each issue, identify:
Step 4.2: Recommend Specific Fixes For violations, provide:
Issue: [Specific violation]
Affected: [Names and dates]
Root cause: [Why this happened]
Immediate fix: [Swap or reassignment specific to dates]
Long-term fix: [Schedule design change]
Impact assessment: [How fix affects other residents]
Step 4.3: Validate Fix Doesn't Create New Issues After proposing fix:
Escalate to Program Director when:
Problem: Resident scheduled for clinic after 24-hour call Rule: Must have 8+ hours off after extended duty Fix: Remove clinic assignment, ensure coverage
Problem: Same residents covering multiple holidays Rule: Fair distribution, 80-hour limit still applies Fix: Rotate holiday assignments, check cumulative hours
Problem: Night shift with insufficient faculty Rule: PGY-1s need 2:1 supervision Fix: Add faculty coverage or redistribute residents
When reporting compliance status:
## ACGME Compliance Summary
**Overall Status:** [COMPLIANT / WARNING / VIOLATION]
### Violations (Immediate Action Required)
- [List specific violations with affected people/dates]
### Warnings (Action Within 48h)
- [List warnings approaching thresholds]
### Recommendations
1. [Specific actionable fix]
2. [Specific actionable fix]
### Affected Personnel
- [List names and specific issues]
Coordination: ACGME compliance must be verified after each schedule generation
1. safe-schedule-generation creates schedule
2. acgme-compliance validates against all rules
3. If violations found, feedback to schedule generation
4. Repeat until compliant schedule produced
Coordination: Ensure constraints encode ACGME rules correctly
1. constraint-preflight validates constraint definitions
2. acgme-compliance tests constraints with real schedule data
3. Verify constraints actually prevent violations
Coordination: Verify swaps don't violate ACGME rules
1. swap-execution proposes swap
2. acgme-compliance pre-validates swap impact
3. Only execute if compliant
# Full compliance check
python -m app.scheduling.acgme_validator --schedule_id=current --full-report
# Quick 80-hour check
python -m app.scheduling.acgme_validator --check-rule 80-hour --residents=all
# Specific resident check
python -m app.scheduling.acgme_validator --resident-id=PGY1-01 --period=4-weeks
# Export compliance report
python -m app.scheduling.acgme_validator --schedule_id=current --export=pdf
# Get hours for resident this week
SELECT SUM(duration) FROM assignments
WHERE resident_id = 'PGY1-01'
AND assignment_date BETWEEN CURRENT_DATE - 7 AND CURRENT_DATE;
# Check consecutive duty days
SELECT DISTINCT(assignment_date) FROM assignments
WHERE resident_id = 'PGY1-01'
ORDER BY assignment_date DESC LIMIT 10;
# Supervision ratio check
SELECT rotation, COUNT(DISTINCT resident_id), COUNT(DISTINCT faculty_id)
FROM assignments
WHERE assignment_date = CURRENT_DATE
GROUP BY rotation;
Input Context Requirements:
Compression Strategy:
Required Context for Next Phase:
# GOOD: Clear implementation of 80-hour rule
def check_80_hour_rule(resident_id: str) -> Tuple[bool, float]:
"""Check if resident exceeds 80-hour weekly average."""
weeks = get_last_4_weeks(resident_id)
hours_per_week = [sum_hours(week) for week in weeks]
average = sum(hours_per_week) / len(hours_per_week)
is_compliant = average <= 80.0
return is_compliant, average
# BAD: Unclear threshold and calculation
def check_hours(resident_id):
hours = get_hours(resident_id) # What period?
if hours > 85: # Why 85? Rule is 80
return "violation"
# GOOD: Clear calculation of supervision ratios
SUPERVISION_RATIOS = {
"PGY1": 2, # 2 residents per faculty
"PGY2": 4,
"PGY3": 4,
}
def verify_supervision(rotation: Rotation) -> bool:
"""Verify supervision ratios for rotation."""
for level, max_ratio in SUPERVISION_RATIOS.items():
residents = count_residents_by_level(rotation, level)
faculty = count_faculty_in_rotation(rotation)
actual_ratio = residents / faculty if faculty > 0 else 0
if actual_ratio > max_ratio:
log_violation(f"{level}: {actual_ratio}:1 exceeds {max_ratio}:1")
return False
return True
# BAD: Magic numbers without explanation
if days_off < 1: # Why 1? Context?
flag_issue()
If validation fails unexpectedly:
If fix implementation fails:
Context: Schedule validation after holiday coverage assignments
Input:
Resident: PGY1-01
Period: December 20-31, 2025
Weekly hours: [78, 82, 79, 85]
Process:
Output:
## ACGME Compliance Violation
**Severity:** VIOLATION
**Rule:** 80-Hour Weekly Limit
**Affected:** PGY1-01
**Period:** December 20-31, 2025
**Violation:** 81.0 hours/week average (exceeds 80.0)
**Root Cause:** Week 4 (Dec 24-31) has 85 hours due to holiday call stacking
**Immediate Fix:**
1. Remove one 24-hour call shift from Week 4
2. Assign call to PGY2-03 (currently at 72 hours average)
3. Result: PGY1-01 drops to 76.0 hours/week average (compliant)
**Long-term Fix:**
- Implement holiday coverage rotation to distribute load
- Add constraint: max 2 call shifts per week during holidays
Context: Night shift schedule validation before deployment
Input:
Rotation: Night Float Inpatient
Date: January 15, 2026
Residents scheduled: 6 (4 PGY-1, 2 PGY-2)
Faculty scheduled: 1
Process:
Output:
## ACGME Supervision Violation
**Severity:** VIOLATION
**Rule:** PGY-1 Supervision Ratio (2:1 maximum)
**Date:** January 15, 2026
**Rotation:** Night Float Inpatient
**Current State:**
- 4 PGY-1 residents
- 1 faculty
- Ratio: 4:1 (exceeds 2:1 requirement)
**Required Action:**
- Add 1 additional faculty to night shift
- Suggested: FAC-04 (available, credentialed for night float)
**Verification:**
- Post-fix ratio: 4 PGY-1 / 2 faculty = 2:1 (compliant)
| Failure Mode | Symptom | Root Cause | Recovery Steps |
|---|---|---|---|
| False Positive - "Violation" on Compliant Schedule | Tool reports 80-hour violation when resident worked 78 hours | Calculation includes non-duty time (breaks, meals) | 1. Verify duty hour definition<br>2. Exclude breaks/meals from calculation<br>3. Re-run validation with corrected data |
| Missing Consecutive Day Off | Tool misses 1-in-7 violation | Algorithm only checks calendar days, not 24-hour periods | 1. Rewrite check to use 24-hour rolling windows<br>2. Account for shift boundaries (e.g., 11 PM - 11 PM) |
| Supervision Ratio Miscalculation | Faculty counted as "available" but on leave | Data source doesn't reflect real-time availability | 1. Cross-check with absence/leave calendar<br>2. Mark faculty as unavailable if on TDY/leave<br>3. Re-run supervision check |
| Data Staleness | Validation uses outdated schedule data | Cache not invalidated after swap | 1. Clear schedule cache<br>2. Re-fetch from database<br>3. Re-run validation |
| Rule Misinterpretation | Flagging night float as violation | Applying wrong duty period limits to night float | 1. Review ACGME night float exceptions<br>2. Update constraint to allow 6 consecutive nights<br>3. Document exception in validation logic |
| Fix Creates New Violation | Resolving 80-hour issue causes 1-in-7 violation | Insufficient validation of proposed fix | 1. Run full compliance check on proposed fix<br>2. Use iterative solver to find compliant solution<br>3. If no solution exists, escalate to Program Director |
Coordination: ACGME compliance must be verified after each schedule generation
1. safe-schedule-generation creates schedule
2. acgme-compliance validates against all rules
3. If violations found, feedback to schedule generation
4. Repeat until compliant schedule produced
Coordination: Ensure constraints encode ACGME rules correctly
1. constraint-preflight validates constraint definitions
2. acgme-compliance tests constraints with real schedule data
3. Verify constraints actually prevent violations
Coordination: Verify swaps don't violate ACGME rules
1. swap-execution proposes swap
2. acgme-compliance pre-validates swap impact
3. Only execute if compliant
Tool Usage Pattern:
# Get validation data
schedule_data=$(mcp call get_schedule --schedule_id=current)
# Run comprehensive ACGME check
violations=$(mcp call validate_acgme_compliance --data="$schedule_data")
# If violations found, generate remediation plan
if [ -n "$violations" ]; then
# Use acgme-compliance skill to analyze and propose fixes
# Then call swap_execution or schedule_generation to implement
fi
After running ACGME compliance validation, verify:
thresholds.md for configurable warning levelsexceptions.md for documented exception proceduresまだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Security audit, hardening, threat modeling (STRIDE/PASTA), Red/Blue Team, OWASP checks, code review, incident response, and infrastructure security for any project.
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。
Guides the creation of agile user stories and Gherkin feature files. Use when the user wants to create a user story, write acceptance criteria, define Gherkin scenarios, or author BDD feature files. This should trigger for requests such as Create a user story; Write a user story; I need to write a user story. Part of cursor-rules-java project
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。
Facilitates conversational discovery to create Architectural Decision Records (ADRs) for non-functional requirements using the ISO/IEC 25010:2023 quality model. Use when the user wants to document quality attributes, NFR decisions, security/performance/scalability architecture, or design systems with measurable quality criteria. This should trigger for requests such as Create ADR for Non-functional requirements; Document Non-functional requirements; Capture Non-functional requirements; Generate Non-functional requirements in an ADR. Part of cursor-rules-java project
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 a health check on an existing project: dependency audit, security scan, test runner detection, CI/CD evaluation, and missing configuration analysis. Maps the three execution gates (pre/in/post) from /10x-bootstrapper to an assessment framework for existing codebases. Reads optional context/foundation/stack-assessment.md from /10x-stack-assess to focus checks on identified gaps. Writes context/foundation/health-check.md with findings, prioritized fixes, and an agent-readiness verdict. Use when the user has an existing project and wants to verify its health before working with an agent. Trigger phrases: "health check", "check my project", "audit my project", "is my project healthy", "sprawdź projekt", "audyt projektu", "health-check", "project health". Use AFTER /10x-stack-assess (brownfield chain), BEFORE agent onboarding (m1-l4).
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。
You MUST use this when building projects end-to-end. Orchestrates all 12 team roles — automatically switches between CTO, architect, PM, engineers, SRE, security, DBA, QA, and EM based on the current phase of work. Starts with brainstorming before any implementation.
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 you need to add or configure Maven plugins in your pom.xml — including quality tools (enforcer, surefire, failsafe, jacoco, pitest, spotbugs, pmd), security scanning (OWASP), code formatting (Spotless), version management, container image build (Jib), build information tracking, and benchmarking (JMH) — through a consultative, modular step-by-step approach that only adds what you actually need. This should trigger for requests such as Add Maven plugins in pom.xml; Improve Maven plugins in pom.xml. Part of cursor-rules-java project
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。