Loading...
Loading...
Found 53 Skills
Build web interfaces with genuine design quality, not AI slop. Use for any frontend work - landing pages, web apps, dashboards, admin panels, components, interactive experiences. Activates for both greenfield builds and modifications to existing applications. Detects existing design systems and respects them. Covers composition, typography, color, motion, and copy. Verifies results via screenshots before declaring done.
Compare UX patterns across multiple reference apps using pattern libraries produced by ux-extract. Reads 2+ pattern-library.md files, walks them category by category, identifies where apps converge (strong signal), where they diverge (genuine design choice), what's unique to one app, and what's absent across the set. Produces an opinionated comparison document with recommendations for a new build. No browser needed — pure markdown analysis. Trigger with 'compare UX patterns', 'how do top apps handle X', 'ux comparison', 'pattern comparison across reference apps'.
Use when writing product recommendation content (种草文案) for Xiaohongshu, creating authentic product reviews, crafting persuasive product descriptions, or driving purchase decisions through genuine content
Critical analysis of research papers, academic manuscripts, preprints, and technical studies — evaluating methodology, claims-evidence alignment, contribution significance, and intellectual honesty. Produces coherent analytical responses (not checklists) that distinguish genuine weaknesses from standard field limitations. Governs intellectual posture: collegial reader, not adversarial reviewer. Triggers on: "critique this paper", "review this research", "what do you think of this paper", "analyze this study", "evaluate the methodology", "is this paper sound", "assess this research", "strengths and weaknesses of this paper", "does the evidence support the claims". Use this skill when the user provides a research paper, preprint, or technical study and asks for critical evaluation of its scientific merit, methodology, or contribution — not formatting, citation hygiene, or submission readiness (use manuscript-review for those).
Design and conduct mixed methods research using convergent, explanatory sequential, or exploratory sequential strategies with genuine integration of qualitative and quantitative strands. Use this skill when the user needs to choose a mixed methods design, integrate qualitative and quantitative data at design, methods, or interpretation levels, justify mixing on pragmatist grounds, or when they ask 'which mixed methods design should I use', 'how do I integrate qual and quant findings', or 'is running both qual and quant enough to be mixed methods'.
The canonical rulebook of UI craft and feel. Every element must earn its place and do its one job well; the surface must be tight, clean, calm, and genuinely pleasant to use. The single source of truth that landing-audit grades against and that shipit checks touched UI files against before commit. Use when building or editing ANY user-facing UI, page, screen, hero, or component, or when the user mentions design, layout, hierarchy, typography, color, spacing, contrast, CTAs, or micro-interactions.
When the user wants to improve their ability to create genuine connection and trust quickly with prospects. Also use when the user mentions "connecting with prospects," "building trust," "relationship selling," "warming up cold leads," "getting prospects to open up," or "first impressions."
Run any question, idea, or decision through a council of 5 AI advisors who independently analyze it, peer-review each other anonymously, and synthesize a final verdict. Based on Karpathy's LLM Council methodology. MANDATORY TRIGGERS: 'council this', 'run the council', 'war room this', 'pressure-test this', 'stress-test this', 'debate this'. STRONG TRIGGERS (use when combined with a real decision or tradeoff): 'should I X or Y', 'which option', 'what would you do', 'is this the right move', 'validate this', 'get multiple perspectives', 'I can't decide', 'I'm torn between'. Do NOT trigger on simple yes/no questions, factual lookups, or casual 'should I' without a meaningful tradeoff (e.g. 'should I use markdown' is not a council question). DO trigger when the user presents a genuine decision with stakes, multiple options, and context that suggests they want it pressure-tested from multiple angles.
Use this skill whenever deciding what features to extract from raw marketplace assets — listing photos, owner-entered listing metadata, sitter wizard responses — to power item-to-item (similar listings), user-to-item (homefeed ranking), or user-to-user (mutual-fit matching) recommenders in a two-sided trust marketplace. Covers asset auditing, first-principles feature decomposition from the decision the user is making, vision-feature extraction (CLIP, room-type classification, amenity detection, aesthetic and quality scoring), listing text and metadata encoding (categoricals, multi-hot amenities, H3 geo-hashing, sentence-transformer description embeddings, structured pet triples), sitter wizard design (information-gain ordering, multiple-choice over free text, genuine skippability, hard constraint versus soft preference), derived-composition patterns for i2i / u2i / u2u (precomputed ANN shelves, multi-modal fusion, two-tower affinity, symmetric mutual-fit scoring, interpretable subscores), feature quality governance (single registry, training-serving parity, coverage and drift alarms, PII scrubbing, schema versioning), and incremental value proof (one feature at a time, ablation A/B, kill reviews, exploration slice, permanent feature-free baseline). Trigger even when the user does not explicitly say "feature engineering" but is asking how to get more signal out of listing photos, listing metadata, or the sitter onboarding wizard, or how to improve i2i / u2i / u2u quality without blindly ingesting a new model.
Run a decision through 5 AI advisors with different thinking styles, anonymous peer review, and chairman synthesis. For genuine decisions with stakes and tradeoffs — not simple questions. Based on Karpathy's LLM Council.
Peter Thiel's Monopoly Creation framework applied to a business idea. Spawns a team of specialist agents — Monopoly Anatomist, Secret Hunter, Market Framer, Last Mover Analyst, Girardian — who each apply a distinct lens from Thiel's framework to evaluate whether a venture has genuine monopoly potential. The lead synthesizes into a verdict: does this company have a secret, a 10x advantage, a tiny domination-ready market, and a path to becoming the last mover in its category? Use when the user says "thiel this", "monopoly test", "zero to one analysis", "does this have monopoly potential", or proposes a venture and wants Thiel-style evaluation. Works standalone or after /office-hours and /munger.
Applies cognitive science frameworks for creative thinking to CS and AI research ideation. Use when seeking genuinely novel research directions by leveraging combinatorial creativity, analogical reasoning, constraint manipulation, and other empirically grounded creative strategies.