Loading...
Loading...
Found 29 Skills
Routes human attention to decisions that matter in agent-generated code. Active during planning, implementing, fixing. Defines when and how to place DECISION markers in code comments. Also applies when reviewing a diff/PR on request.
Framework for structured product decision-making. Use when facing complex tradeoffs, aligning stakeholders, documenting decisions, or choosing between multiple valid approaches.
Byzantine consensus voting for multi-agent decision making. Implements voting protocols, conflict resolution, and agreement algorithms for reaching consensus among multiple agents.
Create structured technology trade-off analysis documents with scored comparison matrices. Use this skill whenever the user wants to compare technologies, evaluate architectural options, analyze build-vs-buy decisions, assess migration strategies, or produce any decision document that compares multiple approaches across weighted dimensions. Triggers on: 'trade-off analysis', 'tradeoff', 'comparison matrix', 'evaluate options', 'which technology should we use', 'compare approaches', 'pros and cons of', 'build vs buy', 'migration analysis', 'consolidation analysis', 'technology selection'. Also use when the user has completed technical research and wants to structure findings into a decision document.
This skill is used when users request phrases such as 'handle PR review issues', 'fix review items', 'resolve PR feedback', 'process review issues one by one', 'complete review tasks', 'run pr review resolver', 'resolve PR review', 'address review comments', 'fix review findings', or 'handle code review'. It reads the review comments of the PR associated with the current branch, discusses each unresolved issue with the user one by one, lets the user decide on the handling approach, and executes fixes in parallel as background subtasks.
Resolve implementation ambiguities before planning begins. Two modes: Discussion mode surfaces gray areas with concrete options for greenfield work. Assumptions mode reads the codebase, forms evidence-based opinions, and asks the user to correct only what's wrong (brownfield work). Use for "discuss ambiguities", "resolve gray areas", "clarify before planning", "assumptions mode", "what are the gray areas", "before we plan". Do NOT use for broad design exploration (use feature-design) or for planning itself (use feature-plan).
Generate a stakeholder update tailored to audience and cadence. Use when writing a weekly or monthly status for leadership, announcing a launch, escalating a risk or blocker, or translating the same progress into exec-brief, engineering-detail, or customer-facing versions.
[Planning] Validate plan with critical questions interview
Align stakeholders and secure buy-in by producing a Stakeholder Alignment Pack (alignment brief, stakeholder map, exec decision principles, pre-brief plan, alignment meeting plan, decision summary + comms). Use for stakeholder alignment, buy-in, executive alignment, cross-functional alignment. Category: Communication.
Processes meeting notes or transcripts to extract structured information. Use after meetings to quickly generate action items, capture decisions, and create follow-up tasks. Extracts: action items with owners, decisions made, key discussion points, follow-up tasks with priorities.
Document the finalized tech stack selections, architecture decisions, long-term constraints, and coding conventions in the project into searchable permanent records. No one will remember why X was chosen six months later, but with decision documents, at least the background can be understood before making changes next time. Four categories: tech-stack (which tools/libraries/frameworks to use), architecture (how the system is organized), constraint (what is not allowed), convention (what is uniformly done). Trigger scenarios: Proactively trigger after making important choices during feature-design or issue-analyze, or when the user says "record the decision", "archive tech selection", "ADR", "record this constraint", "write down the convention". Only archive finalized decisions; do not archive proposed solutions under discussion.
Expert Architecture Decision Record (ADR) creation and lifecycle management based on Olaf Zimmermann's methodology. Use when creating ADRs, reviewing architectural decisions, evaluating decision readiness, writing MADR templates, assessing decision quality, or managing ADR logs. Covers the full lifecycle from readiness (START criteria) through creation, MADR formatting, completion (ECADR criteria), and ongoing maintenance.