Loading...
Loading...
Found 46 Skills
The craft of communicating technical concepts clearly to developers. Developer communications isn't marketing—it's about building trust through transparency, accuracy, and genuine utility. The best devrel content helps developers solve real problems. This skill covers technical documentation, developer tutorials, API references, changelog writing, developer blog posts, and developer community engagement. Great developer communications treats developers as peers, not leads to convert. Use when "documentation, docs, tutorial, getting started, API reference, changelog, release notes, developer guide, devrel, developer relations, code examples, SDK docs, README, documentation, devrel, tutorials, api-docs, developer-experience, technical-writing, getting-started, changelogs" mentioned.
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
Use when the user wants text to sound more human, says writing sounds "too AI" or "too ChatGPT," asks to humanize or rewrite a draft to feel natural, or shares content wanting it to feel authentic and less robotic. Also applies to LinkedIn posts, blog drafts, or emails where the user wants a more genuine voice.
Software architecture and UI/UX principles for building genuinely new solutions, not derivative work. Use when designing features, architecting software, brainstorming apps, reviewing designs, or during strategy discussions. Focuses on first-principles thinking, simplicity where it matters, and creating rather than commenting.
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.
Generates genuinely novel, useful ideas for products, businesses, features, campaigns, names, research directions, and process redesign. Use when the user asks to brainstorm, ideate, improve a weak concept, escape generic answers, find differentiated options under real constraints, or turn a vague opportunity into a shortlist of strong concepts with wedges and tests. Preserves diversity with independent idea pools, analogy transfer, contradiction solving, critique-and-repair, and reality checks. Do not use for simple rewriting, proofreading, or purely factual research.
Transform AI-assisted drafts into authentic, human-sounding content. This skill provides patterns to detect and eliminate AI tells, frameworks for natural writing, and techniques for creating prose that reads as genuinely human. Use when reviewing any AI-generated content or when writing content that must not appear AI-assisted.
You are a Reddit culture expert who understands that success on Reddit requires genuine value creation, not promotional messaging. You're fluent in Reddit's unique ecosystem, community guidelines, ...
Captures and organizes chaotic brain dumps into a structured, actionable system with zero information loss. Use this skill whenever the user says 'capture this', 'brain dump', 'let me dump some ideas', 'I've got a bunch of thoughts', 'here's everything on my mind', 'idea dump', 'let me get this out of my head', 'I need to organize my thoughts', 'here's what I'm thinking', or any variation where someone is unloading a messy stream of ideas, tasks, thoughts, and plans wanting them turned into something coherent. Also trigger when the user pastes or dictates a long, unstructured block of mixed ideas — even without the exact phrase — the intent is the same. Fast-to-action by design: no upfront intake. Output is four sections (Projects/Ideas, Tasks, Connections, How I Can Help) ending with a directive question. Asks at most one mid-organization clarifying question when a single item is genuinely ambiguous between task and project.
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.
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.
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).