Loading...
Loading...
Found 46 Skills
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.
Makes AI-generated content sound genuinely human — not just cleaned up, but alive. Use when content feels robotic, uses too many AI clichés, lacks personality, or reads like it was written by committee. Triggers: 'this sounds like AI', 'make it more human', 'add personality', 'it feels generic', 'sounds robotic', 'fix AI writing', 'inject our voice'. NOT for initial content creation (use content-production). NOT for SEO optimization (use content-production Mode 3).
Expert guide for creating authentic, human-sounding content that avoids AI-generated writing patterns. Use when reviewing, editing, or creating content to ensure it sounds genuinely human and avoids AI detection markers.
Expert in building crypto-native communities - token holder communities, NFT communities, DAO governance, alpha groups, and navigating the unique dynamics of Web3 culture. Covers managing speculation, building through bear markets, and creating genuine value beyond price. Use when "web3 community, crypto community, token community, nft community, dao community, alpha group, holder community, crypto discord, " mentioned.
Apply principles of good design taste when creating, reviewing, or critiquing any creative or technical work. Use this skill whenever the user asks you to design something, review a design, create UI/UX, architect a system, write something with aesthetic intent, evaluate the quality of code or creative work, or asks for feedback on whether something is "good." Also trigger when users mention taste, aesthetics, beauty in design, elegance, simplicity, or when they want help making something not just functional but genuinely well-crafted. This skill applies across domains: software, writing, visual design, architecture, presentations, APIs, data models, and more. Even if the user doesn't explicitly mention "design," use this skill when the underlying task is about making something better, more elegant, or more refined.
Root-cause-driven solution decision framework for the hardest problems across any domain. This is the nuclear option — it consumes significant tokens through exhaustive multi-branch root cause analysis, MECE solution enumeration, and domain-adaptive external validation. Use ONLY for genuinely difficult problems: recurring failures that resist repeated fix attempts, complex systemic issues with no clear solution path, decisions where multiple approaches exist and the wrong choice has high cost, problems with multiple interacting causes spanning components or teams. Trigger when: the user says 'what's the best way to fix X', 'why does this keep happening', 'how should we approach this', 'find the root cause', 'what are my options for fixing X', 'analyze this problem systematically', 'evaluate our options for X', 'what's the right approach and why', or expresses frustration that previous solutions didn't stick. Do NOT use for: problems where the answer is already obvious or requires no analysis, straightforward issues with clear solutions, or routine investigation. If the problem can be solved in 5 minutes of investigation, this skill is overkill.
Orchestrate multiple code-writing agents in parallel when the work contains 3 or more genuinely independent build tasks. Use for execution lanes with disjoint write scope, clear task boundaries, and no dependency edges that would force sequencing.
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'.
Parliamentary procedure as forcing function for genuine deliberation
Designing lead magnets that earn the email. The discipline of building gated content (ebooks, templates, checklists, swipe files, mini-courses, free tools) that delivers genuine standalone value while qualifying the lead and warming them for what comes next. Honest about thin-bait (overpromises, underdelivers), kitchen-sink-resource (everything, helps with nothing), and earned-value-magnet (delivers standalone value while qualifying the lead). Triggers on lead magnet, gated content, opt-in offer, ebook, checklist, template, swipe file, mini-course, free tool, content upgrade, freebie, opt-in, list-building offer. Also triggers when an audience is being asked for an email and the offer attached to that ask needs design discipline, when previous lead magnets converted but did not produce qualified leads, or when a lead magnet is being scoped for the first time.
Detects AI-written text, scores it against a detection rubric, provides line-by-line edit recommendations, and rewrites content to sound genuinely human. Use when the user asks to 'humanize' text, detect AI writing, remove 'AI voice,' make copy 'less robotic,' pass AI detection tools, or rewrite content to 'sound human.'
NEVER escalate without investigation first. This is the Iron Law. Use when evaluating whether to escalate models, facing genuine complexity requiring deeper reasoning, novel patterns with no existing solutions, high-stakes decisions requiring capability investment. Do not use when thrashing without investigation - investigate root cause first. DO NOT use when: time pressure alone - urgency doesn't change task complexity. DO NOT use when: "just to be safe" - assess actual complexity instead.