Loading...
Loading...
Found 26 Skills
Challenges AI-generated plans, code, designs, and decisions before you commit. Pairs with any other skill as a review layer. Uses pre-mortem analysis, inversion thinking, and Socratic questioning to find what AI missed — blind spots, hidden assumptions, failure modes, and optimistic shortcuts. The skill that asks "are you sure about that?" so you don't have to. Triggers on: "challenge this", "devils advocate", "stress test this plan", "what could go wrong", "poke holes in this", "review this critically", "second opinion on this design", "what am I missing". Use this skill when you need critical review of any AI-generated output, architecture decision, implementation plan, or code before committing to it.
Full RPI lifecycle orchestrator. Research → Plan → Pre-mortem → Crank → Vibe → Post-mortem. One command, sequential skill invocations with human gates and hands-free validation. Triggers: "rpi", "full lifecycle", "end to end", "research to production".
Apply structured critical thinking — identifying claims, evidence, reasoning chains, hidden assumptions, and logical fallacies — to evaluate or construct specific written arguments rigorously. Use this skill when the user presents a concrete argument, claim, op-ed, research finding, or piece of reasoning to be analyzed for logical validity or flaws, even if they say 'is this argument valid', 'what logical fallacies are in this', or 'what assumptions am I making in this thesis'. Do NOT use for casual plan review, trip planning, project risk brainstorming, or pre-mortems — 'poke holes in my plan' requests are red-team / risk review, not argument analysis.
Load when user says "mental model", "think through this", "structured thinking", "help me decide", "analyze this problem", "first principles", "pre-mortem", "stakeholder mapping", "what framework should I use", or any specific model name. Provides 59 thinking frameworks for decision-making, problem decomposition, and strategic analysis.
A deterministic thinking partner that challenges assumptions and applies mental models to sharpen decisions, solve problems, and think more clearly. Use this skill whenever a user says "help me think through X", "challenge my thinking", "what am I missing", "apply mental models to this", "play devil's advocate", "stress test this idea", "poke holes in my plan", "help me decide between X and Y", "what are the second-order effects", "I'm stuck on a decision", names any specific model (SWOT, first principles, inversion, pre-mortem, etc.), or asks for structured reasoning on any ambiguous, high-stakes, or complex problem. Also trigger when the user seems uncertain, is rationalizing, or is asking "am I thinking about this right?" Even casual phrases like "what do you think about..." on non-trivial topics should trigger this skill.
Before ANY significant development task (new feature, refactor, integration, migration), run a complete planning ritual by orchestrating other skills in sequence: rubber-duck (clarify scope) -> pre-mortem (assess risks) -> eta (estimate time) -> final confirmation. Do not start coding until the battle plan is approved.
Push the LLM to reconsider, refine, and improve its recent output. Use when user asks for deeper critique or mentions a known deeper critique method, e.g. socratic, first principles, pre-mortem, red team.
Annie Duke's Decision Quality framework applied to a business decision. Spawns a team of specialist agents — Resulting Auditor, Calibrator, Pre-Mortem Analyst, Quit Strategist, Process Architect — who each apply a distinct lens from Duke's framework to evaluate whether a decision is sound regardless of outcome. The lead synthesizes into a stacking analysis: which biases are operating, which process flaws exist, and the honest Duke verdict. Use when the user says "duke this", "is this a good bet", "should I quit", "evaluate this decision", or faces any high-stakes choice under uncertainty and wants rigorous decision-process analysis. Works as a standalone analysis or after /office-hours.
Domain-agnostic strategic decision analysis and wargaming. Auto-classifies scenario complexity: simple decisions get structured analysis (pre-mortem, ACH, decision trees); complex or adversarial scenarios get full multi-turn interactive wargames with AI-controlled actors, Monte Carlo outcome exploration, and structured adjudication. Generates visual dashboards and saves markdown decision journals. Use for business strategy, crisis management, competitive analysis, geopolitical scenarios, personal decisions, or any consequential choice under uncertainty. NOT for simple pros/cons lists, non-strategic decisions, or academic debate.
Use when coordinating software development projects requiring multiple specialists (architect, developers, mathematician, statistician, notebook-writer) with quality gates for archival setup, requirements, architecture, pre-mortem, code review, testing, and version control integration.
Prospective failure analysis using Gary Klein's swing-mortem technique. Assumes complete failure, works backward to identify risks, leading indicators, and circuit breakers. Counters optimism bias by forcing systematic exploration of failure modes before they materialize. Use for project plans, architecture decisions, technology adoption, business strategy, or feature launches. Triggers on "리스크", "위험", "실패하면", "swing-mortem", "뭐가 잘못될 수 있어", "risk", "what could go wrong", "걱정되는 점", "failure modes", "리스크 분석", "위험 분석".
Use to stress-test predictions by assuming they failed and working backward to identify why. Invoke when confidence is high (>80% or <20%), need to identify tail risks and unknown unknowns, or want to widen overconfident intervals. Use when user mentions premortem, backcasting, what could go wrong, stress test, or black swans.