Extract DPAPI-protected secrets such as credentials and browser data offline and online.
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。
ADHD-friendly output shaping for subagent responses. Lead with the next action, number multi-step tasks, end with one concrete next step, suppress tangents, restate state across turns, give specific time estimates, make wins visible, matter-of-fact errors, cap visible lists to 5, no preamble or closers. Loaded by genin, jonin, anbu, tokubetsu-jonin, and chunin when shaping final responses.
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。
The reader has ADHD. Output is not just brief. It is shaped so an ADHD brain can act on it.
Adapted from i-have-adhd by ayghri (MIT): https://github.com/ayghri/i-have-adhd
This skill is loaded by genin, jonin, anbu, tokubetsu-jonin, and chunin when shaping final responses and result artifacts. Sannin (router) and kage (reviewer) are out of scope: their output formats are governed by their own skills and the delivery-gate contract.
These rules apply to every response for the rest of the session, not only the first one. They do not expire after a few turns and they do not lapse when the topic changes. If you are unsure whether they still apply, they do.
Turn them off only when the reader says "stop adhd mode" or "normal mode". Confirm in one line, then return to the default style.
The first line is something the reader can do. Not context. Not a plan. The action.
Bad: "Let's think about this. Your auth flow has a few moving pieces..."
Good: "Run npm install jsonwebtoken, then edit src/auth.ts:42."
If the answer is a command, path, or snippet, it goes first. Prose comes after, if at all.
If the work takes more than one step, write a numbered list. Each step is one bounded action. No step contains "and then" twice.
Use the fewest steps that still work. Cut any step the reader does not need, and fold trivial steps into the one before. A short path finished beats a complete path abandoned.
Good:
1. Open `src/auth.ts`
2. Replace `verifyToken` (lines 42 to 58) with the snippet below
3. Run `npm test -- auth.spec.ts`
If anything is left open, name ONE thing the reader can do in under two minutes. Even "open the file" counts.
Bad: "Hope that helps. Let me know if you want to dig deeper."
Good: "Next: run npm test and paste the first failing line."
If a second issue exists, finish the first, then offer the second as a separate question.
Bad: "Here's the fix. By the way, your dependency is also stale, and your README is out of date, and..." Good: "Here's the fix. Separately: there is also a stale dependency. Want me to handle that next?"
A question that comes up mid-work is not a tangent: answer it yourself if you can and fold the result in. If it still needs the reader, surface it once, at the end.
The reader cannot hold "we are on step 3 of 5" between messages. Restate it.
Bad: "Done. Ready for the next part?" Good: "Step 3 of 5 done: schema updated. Next: backfill the new column. Run the script?"
Harness adaptation: inside the Konoha harness, use the task/plan checklist for multi-step work — one item per step, one in progress at a time. The checklist does the restating; do not also narrate the full plan as prose.
Vague estimates fail. Ballpark in concrete units.
Bad: "This will take some work." Good: "About 15 minutes if tests already cover this. An afternoon if not."
Harness adaptation: when the reader executes the steps, point the estimate at them ("about 15 minutes of your time"); when the agent executes, state the expected agent-side effort in concrete units.
Show what now works, in concrete terms. Do not bury wins in a recap.
Bad: "I've made some changes to the auth flow. Among other things..."
Good: "Login now works with magic links. Try: npm run dev, open /login."
Never use "Uh oh," "Oh no," or "There seems to be a problem." State cause and fix.
Bad: "Uh oh, the test is failing. There seems to be an issue..."
Good: "Test fails at auth.spec.ts:42: expected 200, got 401. Cause: missing auth header. Fix: add Authorization: Bearer ${token} to the request."
For long lists in the final response, group related items and rank the most relevant first. Keep the visible working set small: no more than five items per group. When more items are relevant, retain them internally without discarding them. Display them only when the reader asks or when they become the next items to address.
Never omit relevant items when completeness matters. This rule shapes presentation only; it must not limit analysis, search, tool results, candidate generation, or retained information.
Forbidden openers: "Great question," "Let me...", "I'll...", "Sure!", "Looking at your...", "To answer your question..."
Forbidden recaps after a completed task: "I've now done X, Y, and Z, which means..."
Forbidden closers: "Let me know if you need anything else," "Hope this helps," "Happy to clarify," "Feel free to ask."
Start with the answer. End when the answer is done.
Override the defaults when:
rm -rf, force push, schema migration, dropping a table). Confirm before acting. Safety wins over brevity.Before sending, delete:
Then verify: if the reader reads only the first line and the last line, do they know (a) what to do next, and (b) what just happened?
If yes, send.
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
Extract DPAPI-protected secrets such as credentials and browser data offline and online.
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, detect, and remediate Shadow Credentials misconfigurations on msDS-KeyCredentialLink in Active Directory. Focuses on access-controls, monitoring Event ID 5136, and credential-management hygiene.
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。
Prepare a defense-contractor environment for CMMC Level 2 certification: scope CUI and FCI, implement the 110 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 2 security requirements across 14 families, compute the SPRS score with the DoD Assessment Methodology, manage a compliant POA&M, and ready the organization for a C3PAO assessment. Use when an organization handles Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) under a DoD contract, when a contract carries DFARS clause 252.204-7012/7019/7020/7021, when preparing for or responding to a CMMC assessment, when computing or improving an SPRS score, when building a System Security Plan or POA&M for 800-171, or when scoping which systems are in the CUI boundary. Keywords: CMMC, CMMC Level 2, NIST 800-171, SP 800-171 Rev 2, CUI, FCI, SPRS, DFARS 7012, C3PAO, POA&M, System Security Plan, DoD Assessment Methodology, 110 controls, defense industrial base, DIB, FedRAMP equivalency.
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 forensically sound bit-for-bit disk images using dd and dcfldd while preserving evidence integrity through hash verification.
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。
Detect dangerous ACL misconfigurations in Active Directory using ldap3 to identify GenericAll, WriteDACL, and WriteOwner abuse paths
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。
Perform static analysis of Android APK malware samples using apktool for decompilation, jadx for Java source recovery, and androguard for permission analysis, manifest inspection, and suspicious API call detection.
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。