算法艺术创作
algorithmic-art
通过代码和可调参数创作生成艺术与交互式视觉效果。
miro-data-handling【设计与创意】Design and implement repository-side controls for Miro reads, storage, exports, redaction, retention, and deletion by purpose and data class. Use when processing collaborative board content. Trigger with "miro board data handling".
独立 GitHub 快照 · 自动分类 · 以原作者文档为准
name: miro-data-handling description: "Design and implement repository-side controls for Miro reads, storage, exports, redaction, retention, and deletion by purpose and data class. Use when processing collaborative board content. Trigger with "miro board data handling"." argument-hint: "[workflow] [data-class]" allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, WebFetch, Write, Edit version: 1.9.0 author: Jeremy Longshore jeremy@intentsolutions.io license: MIT tags:
Assume collaborative canvases can contain personal, confidential, regulated, or credential-like material; use the evidence produced here to make the next decision explicit and reviewable.
Use Read, Glob, and Grep to inspect the repository, configuration names, adapters, tests, and evidence. Use WebFetch only for current official Miro documentation. Use Write or Edit after confirming the requested mode, target environment, tenant, board, and approval boundary. These declared tools do not call authenticated Miro APIs or deployment CLIs; implement client, configuration, and test changes, then return exact operator commands or an approval-gated handoff for live execution.
For REST work, use OAuth 2.0 Authorization Code with the narrowest Miro scopes. Bind each encrypted token record to its user, application, authorized team, and granted scopes. Never print access tokens, refresh tokens, client secrets, authorization codes, or board content.
Exporting, persisting, training on, or transmitting board content requires data-owner, privacy, and security approval. Pause when the responsible owner or exact target is uncertain.
Return scope, observed contract, proposed or completed actions, verification evidence, approvals, residual risks, and next owner. State what was not inspected or changed so the receipt cannot overclaim coverage.
| Condition | Response |
|---|---|
| Tenant or board context mismatches | Stop before mutation and quarantine the credential mapping. |
| Current docs contradict the implementation | Treat the official current contract as a blocker and design an explicit migration. |
| A mutation result is ambiguous | Reconcile state before retrying. |
| Required evidence is unavailable | Return a blocked decision with the smallest safe next probe. |
The example is a redacted operator receipt; identifiers are hashes or bounded labels, not board content or credentials.
boards=12; stored=id,type,hash; content=no; deletion=passed; cross-tenant=denied