本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

google-cloud-waf-reliability

Generates reliability-focused guidance for Google Cloud workloads based on the design principles and recommendations in the Google Cloud Well-Architected Framework. Use this skill to evaluate a workload, identify reliability requirements, and provide actionable recommendations for build, deploy, and manage the workload reliably in Google Cloud.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md6.9 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

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。

Google Cloud Well-Architected Framework skill for the Reliability pillar

Overview

The Reliability pillar of the Google Cloud Well-Architected Framework provides principles and recommendations to help you design, deploy, and manage reliable, resilient, and highly available workloads in Google Cloud. A reliable system consistently performs its intended functions under defined conditions, is resilient to failures, and recovers gracefully from disruptions, thereby minimizing downtime, enhancing user experience, and ensuring data integrity.

Core principles

The recommendations in the reliability pillar of the Well-Architected Framework are aligned with the following core principles:

Relevant Google Cloud products

The following are examples of Google Cloud products and features that are relevant to reliability:

  • Compute: Compute Engine Managed Instance Groups (MIGs), Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE), Cloud Run
  • Networking: Cloud Load Balancing, Cloud CDN, Cloud DNS
  • Storage and databases: Cloud Storage (multi-region), Cloud SQL High Availability, Spanner, Filestore, Firestore
  • Operations: Cloud Monitoring, Cloud Logging, Google Cloud Managed Service for Prometheus
  • Disaster recovery: Backup and DR Service, Filestore backups

Workload assessment questions

Ask appropriate questions to understand the reliability-related requirements and constraints of the workload and the user's organization. Choose questions from the following list:

  • How does your organization define and measure the reliability of your systems in relation to user experience?
  • How does your organization approach setting reliability targets for your services?
  • What is your organization's strategy for ensuring high availability through resource redundancy?
  • How does your organization leverage horizontal scalability to maintain performance and reliability?
  • How does your organization utilize observability (metrics, logs, traces) to gain insights and detect potential failures?
  • How does your organization manage alerting based on observability data to ensure timely responses to significant issues without causing alert fatigue?
  • What measures does your organization take to ensure systems can gracefully degrade during high load or partial failures?
  • How frequently and comprehensively does your organization test for recovery from system failures (e.g., regional failovers, release rollbacks)?
  • What is your organization's approach to testing for recovery from data loss?
  • How does your organization conduct and utilize postmortems after incidents?

Validation checklist

Use the following checklist to evaluate the architecture's alignment with reliability recommendations:

  • User-focused SLIs and SLOs are explicitly defined and actively monitored.
  • The architecture avoids single points of failure through cross-zone or cross-region redundancy.
  • Autoscaling is enabled to handle variable demand without manual intervention.
  • Application and infrastructure health checks are configured to trigger automated failovers.
  • Regular backup schedules are in place, and restoration processes are routinely tested.
  • The system architecture incorporates patterns like circuit breakers, retries with exponential backoff, and rate limiting to support graceful degradation.
  • Game days or chaos engineering practices are regularly held to validate failure recovery.
  • A formalized, blameless postmortem process exists to ensure organizational learning from operational incidents.

レビュー

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。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Design, implement, and audit inclusive digital products using WCAG 2.2 Level AA standards. Use this skill to generate semantic ARIA for Web and accessibility traits for Web and Native platforms (iOS/Android).

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。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月13日 更新

Whole site or product — a full web accessibility (a11y) audit against WCAG 2.2, following the WCAG-EM methodology. Defines scope, samples representative pages and flows, runs the automated tier (`accessibility-scan`) and the hands-on manual tier (`accessibility-inspect`), and produces one conformance report. Grades each finding by severity and evidence basis, and states per-criterion conformance as pass, fail, or undetermined (needs a human). Use it for 'audit my site for accessibility', 'is this product accessible', 'a11y audit', 'WCAG or Section 508 conformance report', or any multi-page assessment. Assesses; does not fix (use `accessibility-fix`) or diff (use `accessibility-diff`). For a single page use `accessibility-scan`; for hands-on keyboard and screen-reader checks use `accessibility-inspect`.

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。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月13日 更新

Regression check — diff a live page's web accessibility (a11y) violations against a baseline. By default it compares your uncommitted changes (stash-based); pass `--branch [<name>]` to compare against a branch. Reports the new WCAG violations introduced, the ones fixed, and the count of pre-existing ones. Use it for 'did my change break accessibility', 'what a11y issues did this PR add', or as a CI gate. For a full scan of one page use `accessibility-scan`; for a whole site use `accessibility-audit`.

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。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月13日 更新

Remediation only — repair web accessibility (a11y) violations against WCAG 2.2 with a baseline, edit, and verify loop. Takes a target (URL, files, directory) or a findings worklist from `accessibility-scan`/`accessibility-inspect`/`accessibility-audit`, applies mechanical fixes as given, leaves TODOs for visual or contextual judgment, and verifies by re-running the baseline check. It only fixes. To find issues use `accessibility-scan` (one page, automated), `accessibility-inspect` (one page, manual), or `accessibility-audit` (whole site, WCAG-EM); to check for regressions use `accessibility-diff`. Use it for 'fix the a11y issues in X', 'make this accessible', 'add missing alt text and labels', 'apply these accessibility fixes', 'remediate these violations'.

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。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月13日 更新

One page, hands-on manual tier — drive a live page through the web accessibility (a11y) checks a rule engine can't decide: keyboard operation and focus order, screen-reader names, roles and states from the accessibility tree, reflow and zoom, reduced motion, form errors, and target size. Grades each finding by evidence basis (verified / confirm-with-a-human / human-required) and severity, and closes every criterion in a ledger: verified, flagged, not exercised, or N/A. Locates and assesses; does not fix (use `accessibility-fix`). Use it for keyboard testing, focus-order checks, screen-reader or a11y-tree review, reflow and zoom at 200%, or 'is this operable, not just lint-clean'. The automated tier is `accessibility-scan`; `accessibility-audit` runs both across a sampled site.

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。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月13日 更新

One page, automated tier — run the web accessibility (a11y) rule engine against a live page and locate every violation it can detect mechanically. Pass a URL, a config target name (e.g. `accesslint:accessibility-scan dev`), or nothing to use the default target from `accesslint.config.json`. Ensures a debuggable Chrome, runs the @accesslint/core engine over CDP, and returns a worklist of live-DOM WCAG 2.2 violations, each grounded to its DOM selector and source `file:line`. Locates; doesn't edit. Use it for 'is this page accessible', 'check a11y on this URL', 'find contrast and alt-text issues', or to verify a UI change. For hands-on keyboard and screen-reader checks use `accessibility-inspect`; for a whole site or product use `accessibility-audit`; to diff against uncommitted changes or a branch use `accessibility-diff`.

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。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月13日 更新

tensology のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する