Loading...
Loading...
Found 372 Skills
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.
SPEC workflow orchestration with EARS format requirements, acceptance criteria, and Plan-Run-Sync integration for MoAI-ADK development methodology. Use when creating SPEC documents, writing EARS requirements, defining acceptance criteria, planning features, or orchestrating the /moai plan phase. Do NOT use for implementation (use moai-workflow-ddd instead) or documentation generation (use moai-workflow-project instead).
Provides MoAI-ADK foundational principles including TRUST 5 quality framework, SPEC-First DDD methodology, delegation patterns, progressive disclosure, and agent catalog reference. Use when referencing TRUST 5 gates, SPEC workflow, EARS format, DDD methodology, agent delegation patterns, or MoAI orchestration rules. Do NOT use for context and token management (use moai-foundation-context instead) or strategic analysis (use moai-foundation-philosopher instead).
Spec-Driven Development methodology for AI-assisted development. Use when working in a LeanSpec project.
Systematic peer review toolkit. Evaluate methodology, statistics, design, reproducibility, ethics, figure integrity, reporting standards, for manuscript and grant review across disciplines.
Use when user starts a novel project or asks how to organize their writing - guides through novel-writer's seven-step methodology and ensures proper workflow
Forces exhaustive problem-solving using corporate PUA rhetoric and structured debugging methodology. MUST trigger when: (1) any task has failed 2+ times or you're stuck in a loop tweaking the same approach; (2) you're about to say 'I cannot', suggest the user do something manually, or blame the environment without verifying; (3) you catch yourself being passive — not searching, not reading source, not verifying, just waiting for instructions; (4) user expresses frustration in ANY form: 'try harder', 'stop giving up', 'figure it out', 'why isn't this working', 'again???', '换个方法', '为什么还不行', '你再试试', '加油', '你怎么又失败了', or any similar sentiment even if phrased differently. Also trigger when facing complex multi-step debugging, environment issues, config problems, or deployment failures where giving up early is tempting. Applies to ALL task types: code, config, research, writing, deployment, infrastructure, API integration. Do NOT trigger on first-attempt failures or when a known fix is already executing successfully.
End-to-end project engineering — from understanding user intent to architecture design, incremental build with verification, and systematic debugging. Covers scheduled tasks (cron jobs), dashboards, web apps, APIs, scripts, and any software the user wants built. Replaces coder + preview-dev with a unified methodology.
dontbesilent Concept Deconstruction. Deconstruct vague business concepts to the atomic level using Wittgenstein + Austrian economics methodology. Triggers: /dbs-deconstruct, /deconstruct-concept, "help me deconstruct this concept", "what exactly does this term mean" Concept deconstruction using Wittgenstein + Austrian economics framework. Trigger: /dbs-deconstruct, "deconstruct this concept", "what does this really mean"
Python testing strategies using pytest, TDD methodology, fixtures, mocking, parametrization, and coverage requirements.
Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Simulates 5 independent reviewers (EIC + 3 peer reviewers + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, and Socratic guided modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review.
Go testing patterns including table-driven tests, subtests, benchmarks, fuzzing, and test coverage. Follows TDD methodology with idiomatic Go practices.