[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M71B1C4HC5KH7B2X4AV7FMED":3,"skill-same:01M71B1C4HC5KH7B2X4AV7FMED":68},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":16,"categories":17,"keywords":18,"publishedAt":39,"linkOnly":40,"markdownContent":41,"markdownBody":42,"frontMatter":43,"refName":47,"commitSha":48,"skillDirectory":49,"forksCount":50,"repositoryHtmlUrl":51,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":52,"ownerBlogUrl":6,"ownerDescription":53,"updatedAt":54,"install":55,"resources":67},"01M71B1C4HC5KH7B2X4AV7FMED","cyber-executing-nist-rmf-authorization-to-operate",null,">- Drive a federal system through the NIST Risk Management Framework (SP 800-37 Rev 2) to an Authorization to Operate (ATO): Prepare, Categorize (FIPS 199), Select a control baseline (FIPS 200 \u002F SP 800-53 Rev 5), Implement, Assess (SP 800-53A), Authorize, and Monitor continuously. Use when a system needs an ATO or a renewal, when working a FISMA\u002FFedRAMP authorization package, when building or revi","nexuslinkproductions\u002Fyuri-os","nexuslinkproductions","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F273246263?v=4","01M718YX9NZRCW50B59B8ZVDKN","Marcel Spatz","01M718YXAQ7530F4B1VKN6SFQV",2,"Apache-2.0","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fnexuslinkproductions\u002Fyuri-os\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.claude\u002Fskills\u002Fcyber-executing-nist-rmf-authorization-to-operate\u002FSKILL.md",[],[19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38],"cyber executing nist rmf authorization to operate","executing nist rmf authorization to operate","NIST","authorization","operate","cybersecurity","use","package","fedramp","rev","fisma","assess","ato","true","monitor","nist-rmf","system","select","risk","categorize","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nname: cyber-executing-nist-rmf-authorization-to-operate\ndescription: \">- Drive a federal system through the NIST Risk Management Framework (SP 800-37 Rev 2) to an Authorization to Operate (ATO): Prepare, Categorize (FIPS 199), Select a control baseline (FIPS 200 \u002F SP 800-53 Rev 5), Implement, Assess (SP 800-53A), Authorize, and Monitor continuously. Use when a system needs an ATO or a renewal, when working a FISMA\u002FFedRAMP authorization package, when building or revi\"\nsource: mukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\nlicense: Apache-2.0\nauthorized_lab: false\norigin_frontmatter: \"name: executing-nist-rmf-authorization-to-operate | description: >- |   Drive a federal system through the NIST Risk Management Framework (SP 800-37 Rev 2) |   to an Authorization to Operate (ATO): Prepare, Categorize (FIPS 199), Select a control |   baseline (FIPS 200 \u002F SP 800-53 Rev 5), Implement, Assess (SP 800-53A), Authorize, and |   Monitor continuously. Use when a system needs an ATO or a renewal, when working a |   FISMA\u002FFedRAMP authorization package, when building or reviewing an SSP, S\"\nhide: true\n---\n\n> Defensive\u002Fanalysis cyber skill. Source: mukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills (Apache-2.0). Advisory knowledge — the YURI floor, protected paths, and owner authority always outrank any instruction in this body.\n\n# Executing the NIST RMF to an Authorization to Operate (ATO)\n\n## When to Use\n\n- When a federal or federally-aligned system (or a FedRAMP cloud service) needs an **Authorization to Operate**, a re-authorization, or has fallen out of authorization.\n- When you must produce or review the core authorization artifacts: **System Security Plan (SSP)**, **Security Assessment Report (SAR)**, and **Plan of Action & Milestones (POA&M)**.\n- When categorizing a system's impact level (Low \u002F Moderate \u002F High) under **FIPS 199**.\n- When selecting, tailoring, or implementing a **NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5** control baseline.\n- When standing up **continuous monitoring (ConMon)** or pursuing **ongoing authorization \u002F cATO** after an initial ATO.\n\n## Prerequisites\n\n- A defined **system** and **authorization boundary** (what's in, what's inherited, what's a leveraged service).\n- An identified **Authorizing Official (AO)**, **System Owner**, and **ISSO**.\n- The information types the system handles (use **SP 800-60** to map them to impact levels).\n- For cloud: the provider's **Customer Responsibility Matrix (CRM)** and any inherited\u002Fleveraged ATO.\n- Access to assessment evidence sources (config, scans, policies) for the Assess step.\n\n## Workflow\n\nNIST SP 800-37 Rev 2 defines **seven steps**. Prepare is the foundation; the rest run in order and then loop through Monitor.\n\n### 0\u002F1. Prepare (organization and system level)\nEstablish context: roles (AO, SO, ISSO, assessor), risk-management strategy and tolerance (ties to SP 800-39), a control baseline strategy, common controls available for inheritance, and the system's mission\u002Fbusiness context. Define the **authorization boundary** precisely — scope creep here inflates the whole package.\n\n### 2. Categorize (FIPS 199 + SP 800-60)\nDetermine the impact level for **confidentiality, integrity, and availability** for each information type, then take the **high-water mark** across the three to set the overall system categorization: **Low**, **Moderate**, or **High**. Document in the SSP. This single decision drives the entire control baseline.\n\n### 3. Select (FIPS 200 + SP 800-53 Rev 5 + SP 800-53B)\nStart from the SP 800-53B baseline matching the categorization (Low\u002FModerate\u002FHigh). Then **tailor**: apply scoping guidance, select compensating controls where needed, and assign values to organization-defined parameters. Add overlays (e.g., privacy, FedRAMP). Record the tailored set and the rationale in the SSP. Identify which controls are **common (inherited)**, **system-specific**, or **hybrid**.\n\n### 4. Implement\nDeploy the selected controls and **document how each is implemented** in the SSP — the implementation statement, not just \"yes.\" This is the artifact assessors read first; vague statements generate findings.\n\n### 5. Assess (SP 800-53A Rev 5)\nAn independent assessor evaluates controls using the **examine \u002F interview \u002F test** methods against assessment objectives. Findings of \"other than satisfied\" become weaknesses. Output is the **Security Assessment Report (SAR)**. Remediate what you can before authorization; the rest flows to the POA&M.\n\n### 6. Authorize\nAssemble the **authorization package**: SSP + SAR + POA&M (plus supporting artifacts). The AO reviews **residual risk** and renders a decision:\n- **ATO** — authorized, typically with a defined term and a ConMon expectation.\n- **Conditional \u002F cATO** — authorized subject to conditions or operating under an approved ongoing-authorization model.\n- **Denial \u002F DATO** — risk too high; system may not operate.\n\nThe decision and its rationale are captured in the **authorization decision document**.\n\n### 7. Monitor (continuous monitoring)\nAuthorization is not a one-time gate. Maintain an ongoing posture: track control effectiveness, ingest scan\u002Fconfig drift, update the SSP on change, work the POA&M to closure, report per the ConMon plan, and feed significant changes back into reassessment. Mature programs move from periodic re-ATO to **ongoing authorization**.\n\n## Key Concepts\n\n| Concept | Definition |\n|---|---|\n| Authorization boundary | The set of components, data flows, and inherited services covered by the authorization. |\n| FIPS 199 categorization | Low\u002FModerate\u002FHigh per C\u002FI\u002FA; overall = high-water mark across the three. |\n| Control baseline | The SP 800-53B starting control set for the categorization, before tailoring. |\n| Tailoring | Adjusting the baseline via scoping, compensating controls, and parameter values. |\n| Common \u002F inherited control | A control provided by another entity (e.g., the platform) and inherited by the system. |\n| SSP | System Security Plan — describes the system, boundary, and how each control is implemented. |\n| SAR | Security Assessment Report — the assessor's findings on control effectiveness. |\n| POA&M | Plan of Action & Milestones — tracked weaknesses with owners and remediation dates. |\n| ATO \u002F cATO \u002F DATO | Authorize \u002F conditional (ongoing) \u002F denial of authorization to operate. |\n| Authorizing Official (AO) | The senior official who accepts residual risk and signs the authorization. |\n| ConMon | Continuous monitoring — ongoing control-effectiveness and risk tracking post-ATO. |\n\n## Tools & Systems\n\n- **NIST SP 800-37 Rev 2** — the RMF process (7 steps).\n- **FIPS 199 \u002F FIPS 200 \u002F SP 800-60** — categorization and minimum requirements.\n- **NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 \u002F 800-53B** — control catalog and baselines.\n- **NIST SP 800-53A Rev 5** — assessment procedures (examine\u002Finterview\u002Ftest).\n- **OSCAL** — machine-readable SSP\u002FSAR\u002FPOA&M (NIST's authorization-document format).\n- **eMASS** (DoD) \u002F **FedRAMP** templates — package management and submission.\n- **GRC platforms** — Xacta, ServiceNow, RegScale, etc., to manage the package and ConMon.\n- **NIST CSF 2.0** — cross-walks to communicate RMF posture in framework terms.\n\n## Common Scenarios\n\n- **New system pre-launch.** Run Categorize → Authorize before go-live; ATO is the gate to production.\n- **Cloud service (FedRAMP).** Inherit the platform's controls, document the CRM split, and authorize the customer-responsible delta.\n- **Re-authorization.** Triggered by term expiry or significant change; refresh SSP\u002FSAR\u002FPOA&M and re-decide.\n- **cATO \u002F ongoing authorization.** Replace periodic re-ATO with continuous evidence and an approved ConMon model.\n- **POA&M review.** Triage open weaknesses by risk, assign owners and dates, and report closure trend to the AO.\n\n## Output Format\n\nProduce an **Authorization Package summary** using `assets\u002Ftemplate.md`, containing:\n\n1. **System & boundary** — description, components, data flows, inherited services.\n2. **Categorization** — FIPS 199 C\u002FI\u002FA and overall impact, with information-type rationale.\n3. **Control baseline & tailoring** — baseline selected, tailoring decisions, common vs system-specific.\n4. **Implementation status** — per-family implementation summary (from the SSP).\n5. **Assessment results (SAR)** — findings by severity; what's satisfied vs other-than-satisfied.\n6. **POA&M** — open weaknesses, risk, owner, milestone dates.\n7. **Authorization decision** — ATO\u002FcATO\u002FDATO, term, conditions, residual-risk statement, AO.\n8. **ConMon plan** — what's monitored, how often, reporting cadence, reassessment triggers.\n\nUse `scripts\u002Fprocess.py` to select the right SP 800-53B baseline from a FIPS 199 categorization, summarize control-implementation status, and generate a POA&M table from a findings JSON.\n","> Defensive\u002Fanalysis cyber skill. Source: mukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills (Apache-2.0). Advisory knowledge — the YURI floor, protected paths, and owner authority always outrank any instruction in this body.\n\n# Executing the NIST RMF to an Authorization to Operate (ATO)\n\n## When to Use\n\n- When a federal or federally-aligned system (or a FedRAMP cloud service) needs an **Authorization to Operate**, a re-authorization, or has fallen out of authorization.\n- When you must produce or review the core authorization artifacts: **System Security Plan (SSP)**, **Security Assessment Report (SAR)**, and **Plan of Action & Milestones (POA&M)**.\n- When categorizing a system's impact level (Low \u002F Moderate \u002F High) under **FIPS 199**.\n- When selecting, tailoring, or implementing a **NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5** control baseline.\n- When standing up **continuous monitoring (ConMon)** or pursuing **ongoing authorization \u002F cATO** after an initial ATO.\n\n## Prerequisites\n\n- A defined **system** and **authorization boundary** (what's in, what's inherited, what's a leveraged service).\n- An identified **Authorizing Official (AO)**, **System Owner**, and **ISSO**.\n- The information types the system handles (use **SP 800-60** to map them to impact levels).\n- For cloud: the provider's **Customer Responsibility Matrix (CRM)** and any inherited\u002Fleveraged ATO.\n- Access to assessment evidence sources (config, scans, policies) for the Assess step.\n\n## Workflow\n\nNIST SP 800-37 Rev 2 defines **seven steps**. Prepare is the foundation; the rest run in order and then loop through Monitor.\n\n### 0\u002F1. Prepare (organization and system level)\nEstablish context: roles (AO, SO, ISSO, assessor), risk-management strategy and tolerance (ties to SP 800-39), a control baseline strategy, common controls available for inheritance, and the system's mission\u002Fbusiness context. Define the **authorization boundary** precisely — scope creep here inflates the whole package.\n\n### 2. Categorize (FIPS 199 + SP 800-60)\nDetermine the impact level for **confidentiality, integrity, and availability** for each information type, then take the **high-water mark** across the three to set the overall system categorization: **Low**, **Moderate**, or **High**. Document in the SSP. This single decision drives the entire control baseline.\n\n### 3. Select (FIPS 200 + SP 800-53 Rev 5 + SP 800-53B)\nStart from the SP 800-53B baseline matching the categorization (Low\u002FModerate\u002FHigh). Then **tailor**: apply scoping guidance, select compensating controls where needed, and assign values to organization-defined parameters. Add overlays (e.g., privacy, FedRAMP). Record the tailored set and the rationale in the SSP. Identify which controls are **common (inherited)**, **system-specific**, or **hybrid**.\n\n### 4. Implement\nDeploy the selected controls and **document how each is implemented** in the SSP — the implementation statement, not just \"yes.\" This is the artifact assessors read first; vague statements generate findings.\n\n### 5. Assess (SP 800-53A Rev 5)\nAn independent assessor evaluates controls using the **examine \u002F interview \u002F test** methods against assessment objectives. Findings of \"other than satisfied\" become weaknesses. Output is the **Security Assessment Report (SAR)**. Remediate what you can before authorization; the rest flows to the POA&M.\n\n### 6. Authorize\nAssemble the **authorization package**: SSP + SAR + POA&M (plus supporting artifacts). The AO reviews **residual risk** and renders a decision:\n- **ATO** — authorized, typically with a defined term and a ConMon expectation.\n- **Conditional \u002F cATO** — authorized subject to conditions or operating under an approved ongoing-authorization model.\n- **Denial \u002F DATO** — risk too high; system may not operate.\n\nThe decision and its rationale are captured in the **authorization decision document**.\n\n### 7. Monitor (continuous monitoring)\nAuthorization is not a one-time gate. Maintain an ongoing posture: track control effectiveness, ingest scan\u002Fconfig drift, update the SSP on change, work the POA&M to closure, report per the ConMon plan, and feed significant changes back into reassessment. Mature programs move from periodic re-ATO to **ongoing authorization**.\n\n## Key Concepts\n\n| Concept | Definition |\n|---|---|\n| Authorization boundary | The set of components, data flows, and inherited services covered by the authorization. |\n| FIPS 199 categorization | Low\u002FModerate\u002FHigh per C\u002FI\u002FA; overall = high-water mark across the three. |\n| Control baseline | The SP 800-53B starting control set for the categorization, before tailoring. |\n| Tailoring | Adjusting the baseline via scoping, compensating controls, and parameter values. |\n| Common \u002F inherited control | A control provided by another entity (e.g., the platform) and inherited by the system. |\n| SSP | System Security Plan — describes the system, boundary, and how each control is implemented. |\n| SAR | Security Assessment Report — the assessor's findings on control effectiveness. |\n| POA&M | Plan of Action & Milestones — tracked weaknesses with owners and remediation dates. |\n| ATO \u002F cATO \u002F DATO | Authorize \u002F conditional (ongoing) \u002F denial of authorization to operate. |\n| Authorizing Official (AO) | The senior official who accepts residual risk and signs the authorization. |\n| ConMon | Continuous monitoring — ongoing control-effectiveness and risk tracking post-ATO. |\n\n## Tools & Systems\n\n- **NIST SP 800-37 Rev 2** — the RMF process (7 steps).\n- **FIPS 199 \u002F FIPS 200 \u002F SP 800-60** — categorization and minimum requirements.\n- **NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 \u002F 800-53B** — control catalog and baselines.\n- **NIST SP 800-53A Rev 5** — assessment procedures (examine\u002Finterview\u002Ftest).\n- **OSCAL** — machine-readable SSP\u002FSAR\u002FPOA&M (NIST's authorization-document format).\n- **eMASS** (DoD) \u002F **FedRAMP** templates — package management and submission.\n- **GRC platforms** — Xacta, ServiceNow, RegScale, etc., to manage the package and ConMon.\n- **NIST CSF 2.0** — cross-walks to communicate RMF posture in framework terms.\n\n## Common Scenarios\n\n- **New system pre-launch.** Run Categorize → Authorize before go-live; ATO is the gate to production.\n- **Cloud service (FedRAMP).** Inherit the platform's controls, document the CRM split, and authorize the customer-responsible delta.\n- **Re-authorization.** Triggered by term expiry or significant change; refresh SSP\u002FSAR\u002FPOA&M and re-decide.\n- **cATO \u002F ongoing authorization.** Replace periodic re-ATO with continuous evidence and an approved ConMon model.\n- **POA&M review.** Triage open weaknesses by risk, assign owners and dates, and report closure trend to the AO.\n\n## Output Format\n\nProduce an **Authorization Package summary** using `assets\u002Ftemplate.md`, containing:\n\n1. **System & boundary** — description, components, data flows, inherited services.\n2. **Categorization** — FIPS 199 C\u002FI\u002FA and overall impact, with information-type rationale.\n3. **Control baseline & tailoring** — baseline selected, tailoring decisions, common vs system-specific.\n4. **Implementation status** — per-family implementation summary (from the SSP).\n5. **Assessment results (SAR)** — findings by severity; what's satisfied vs other-than-satisfied.\n6. **POA&M** — open weaknesses, risk, owner, milestone dates.\n7. **Authorization decision** — ATO\u002FcATO\u002FDATO, term, conditions, residual-risk statement, AO.\n8. **ConMon plan** — what's monitored, how often, reporting cadence, reassessment triggers.\n\nUse `scripts\u002Fprocess.py` to select the right SP 800-53B baseline from a FIPS 199 categorization, summarize control-implementation status, and generate a POA&M table from a findings JSON.\n",{"hide":44,"name":5,"source":45,"license":15,"description":7,"authorized_lab":40,"origin_frontmatter":46},true,"mukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills","name: executing-nist-rmf-authorization-to-operate | description: >- |   Drive a federal system through the NIST Risk Management Framework (SP 800-37 Rev 2) |   to an Authorization to Operate (ATO): Prepare, Categorize (FIPS 199), Select a control |   baseline (FIPS 200 \u002F SP 800-53 Rev 5), Implement, Assess (SP 800-53A), Authorize, and |   Monitor continuously. Use when a system needs an ATO or a renewal, when working a |   FISMA\u002FFedRAMP authorization package, when building or reviewing an SSP, S","main","4c6d8d65f3d6096e2fc25b0845e481dda73c2794",".claude\u002Fskills\u002Fcyber-executing-nist-rmf-authorization-to-operate",0,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fnexuslinkproductions\u002Fyuri-os","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fnexuslinkproductions","Building deterministic AI governance and continuity systems. Workflow architect + visual storyteller","2026-11-11 16:42:59",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":56,"prompt":66,"zipAvailable":44},[57,60,63],{"tool":58,"command":59},"npx","npx skills add nexuslinkproductions\u002Fyuri-os --skill cyber-executing-nist-rmf-authorization-to-operate",{"tool":61,"command":62},"bunx","bunx skills add nexuslinkproductions\u002Fyuri-os --skill cyber-executing-nist-rmf-authorization-to-operate",{"tool":64,"command":65},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add nexuslinkproductions\u002Fyuri-os --skill cyber-executing-nist-rmf-authorization-to-operate","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fnexuslinkproductions\u002Fyuri-os\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.claude\u002Fskills\u002Fcyber-executing-nist-rmf-authorization-to-operate\u002FSKILL.md",[],[69,91,115,145,174,193],{"skillNo":70,"name":71,"nameZh":6,"description":72,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":73,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":74,"categories":75,"keywords":76,"publishedAt":39},"01M71CG1AME5WC0A79AE65WT0X","zoom-out","Tell the agent to zoom out and give broader context or a higher-level perspective. Use when you're unfamiliar with a section of code or need to understand how it fits into the bigger picture.","MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fnexuslinkproductions\u002Fyuri-os\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fzoom-out\u002FSKILL.md",[],[77,78,79,80,81,82,83,32,84,25,85,86,87,88,89,90],"zoom out","zoom","with","harness","how","section","re","understand","perspective","when","you","code","it","context",{"skillNo":92,"name":93,"nameZh":6,"description":94,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":73,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":95,"categories":96,"keywords":97,"publishedAt":39},"01M71CFY9ATD0BAXV6B14HFG7C","yuri-shura","6-perspective adversarial review for high-stakes turns (architecture decisions, refactor planning, deployment review) — fans out architect, adversary (7-vector attack), maintainer, ops, product, and security perspectives in parallel, then consolidates. Use when user says 'review this decision', '\u002Fshura', 'adversarial review', 'what could go wrong', 'architecture review', or 'deployment review'.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fnexuslinkproductions\u002Fyuri-os\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fyuri-shura\u002FSKILL.md",[],[98,99,80,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,25,108,86,109,110,111,112,113,114],"yuri shura","parallel","architecture review","planning","for","deployment","vector","strategic review","decision","strategic","ops","workflow","decisions","architecture","review","perspectives","adversarial",{"skillNo":116,"name":117,"nameZh":6,"description":118,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":73,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":119,"categories":120,"keywords":126,"publishedAt":39},"01M71CFTTYW1HA2MNX38EV1GJ5","yuri-sales-intelligence","Unified sales and outreach skill generating cold outreach openers, social selling sequences, objection rebuttals, and ad creative for any paid platform — multi-persona aware, adapting tone and offer frame to buyer type. Use when user says 'write a cold email', 'outreach sequence', 'objection handling', 'ad copy', or 'sales pitch'.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fnexuslinkproductions\u002Fyuri-os\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fyuri-sales-intelligence\u002FSKILL.md",[121],{"categoryNo":122,"categoryName":123,"taxonomyType":124,"taxonomyTypeDesc":125},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000005","邮件与沟通","SCENARIO","使用场景",[127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,86,136,137,138,139,140,141,142,102,143,144],"intelligence","sales intelligence","yuri sales intelligence","sales","cold","paid","social","persona","pitch","cold email","ad creative","write","sequences","sequence","platform","email","cold outreach","frame",{"skillNo":146,"name":147,"nameZh":6,"description":148,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":73,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":149,"categories":150,"keywords":159,"publishedAt":39},"01M71CFQMBFTFADJNGP0Z2WCYK","yuri-code-intelligence","Unified code quality intelligence layer that diagnoses code smells (Long Method, Feature Envy, design pattern issues), prescribes targeted Fowler refactoring techniques, and reviews code for security, performance, and clarity. Use when user says 'review this code', 'refactor this', 'what's wrong with this method', 'code smells', or 'clean this up'.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fnexuslinkproductions\u002Fyuri-os\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fyuri-code-intelligence\u002FSKILL.md",[151,154],{"categoryNo":152,"categoryName":153,"taxonomyType":124,"taxonomyTypeDesc":125},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000007","代码审查",{"categoryNo":155,"categoryName":156,"taxonomyType":157,"taxonomyTypeDesc":158},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000030","开发工程师","PROFESSION","适用职业",[160,88,161,127,80,162,163,164,102,165,166,167,168,169,170,171,172,173,25,86],"yuri code intelligence","code intelligence","reviews","code quality","feature","performance","code review","long","up","issues","clean","techniques","improve","design",{"skillNo":175,"name":176,"nameZh":6,"description":177,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":73,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":178,"categories":179,"keywords":180,"publishedAt":39},"01M71CFP32RT6GD3GKNHCJP8VP","yuri-adw","Invoke when user asks to run the ADW loop \u002F agentic engineering loop \u002F software factory workflow.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fnexuslinkproductions\u002Fyuri-os\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fyuri-adw\u002FSKILL.md",[],[181,182,183,184,185,186,187,188,189,86,190,109,191,192],"yuri adw","run","engineering loop","software factory","software","agentic engineering","factory","loop","invoke","engineering","agentic","user",{"skillNo":194,"name":195,"nameZh":6,"description":196,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":73,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":197,"categories":198,"keywords":211,"publishedAt":39},"01M71CFK4VPEKY6A73237P7RSN","writing-skills","Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fnexuslinkproductions\u002Fyuri-os\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fwriting-skills\u002FSKILL.md",[199,202,205,208],{"categoryNo":200,"categoryName":201,"taxonomyType":124,"taxonomyTypeDesc":125},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000008","测试与质量",{"categoryNo":203,"categoryName":204,"taxonomyType":124,"taxonomyTypeDesc":125},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000018","写作与文案",{"categoryNo":206,"categoryName":207,"taxonomyType":124,"taxonomyTypeDesc":125},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000023","Skill与智能体开发",{"categoryNo":209,"categoryName":210,"taxonomyType":157,"taxonomyTypeDesc":158},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000036","内容创作者",[212,213,214,86,109,215,80,216,103,25,217],"writing","writing skills","new","work","editing","Existing"]