Loading...
Loading...
Found 74 Skills
Write, review, and improve prompts for any LLM — Claude, GPT, Gemini, Llama, DeepSeek, Mistral, Cohere, Qwen, Grok, Nova, and more. Use when the user asks to "write a system prompt", "improve this prompt", "review my prompt", "make a prompt for", "optimize my prompt", "fix my prompt", "why isn't my prompt working", or wants help writing better prompts for any AI model. Also use when building agents, chatbots, or AI assistants that need system-level instructions, or when the user has a bad prompt they want rewritten. Covers system prompts, task prompts, tool descriptions, and general prompt improvement across all major model families.
Structures and derives research formulas when the user wants to 推导公式, build a theory line, organize assumptions, turn scattered equations into a coherent derivation, or rewrite theory notes into a paper-ready formula document. Use when the derivation target is not yet fully fixed, the main object still needs to be chosen, or the user needs a coherent derivation package rather than a finished theorem proof.
Orchestrates end-to-end interview preparation for senior ML/AI engineers targeting Anthropic and peer companies. Use for prep timeline generation, story coherence across rounds, mock scheduling, and debrief analysis. Activate on "interview prep", "interview loop", "Anthropic interview", "prep timeline". NOT for resume writing, career narratives, or individual round-type practice.
Write multi-chapter books (technical, tutorial, monograph, etc.) end-to-end. Handles outline planning, per-chapter drafting that stays coherent across long manuscripts, chapter review, and final HTML/PDF build. Trigger when user mentions "写书", "写一本书", "出书", "技术书", "book writing", "逐章写作", "O'Reilly", "mdbook", or wants to author a multi-chapter book.
Performs ARA Seal Level 2 semantic epistemic review on Agent-Native Research Artifacts, scoring six dimensions (evidence relevance, falsifiability, scope calibration, argument coherence, exploration integrity, methodological rigor) and producing a constructive, severity-ranked report with a Strong Accept-to-Reject recommendation. Use after Level 1 structural validation passes, when an ARA needs an objective epistemic critique before publication or release.
Build and maintain one coherent company story across all audiences — employees, investors, customers, candidates, and partners. Detects narrative contradictions and ensures the same truth is framed for each audience's needs. Use when preparing investor updates, all-hands presentations, board communications, recruiting narratives, crisis communications, or when user mentions company narrative, messaging consistency, storytelling, all-hands, investor update, or crisis communication.
Validates planning artifacts and reviews code for quality, consistency, and completeness. Use to lint planning documents (cross-references, dependencies, format) or to review changed code (security, coherence, scope, quality).
Day 1 morning move of a Foundation Sprint. Forces explicit team choices on target customer, important problem, team advantage, and competitors and alternatives. Produces a single coherent strategic frame that becomes the input to Day 1 afternoon Differentiation. Use after the sprint brief is signed and Day 1 morning is scheduled. Bundled artifact, not four separate decisions.
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.
Eight-axis judgment code review for the current diff — Correctness, Simplification, Tests, Documentation, Style, Intent, Design/API, Performance (+ Coherence on metadata changes). Five-phase pipeline scope → deterministic tool battery (npx/uvx-preferred, zero-install for the JS + Python majority) → 8 parallel LLM axis reviewers → Haiku validators on sub-80 findings (verbatim rubric, ≥80 threshold) → synthesis with no-silent-drop + Conventional Comments JSONL. Every report closes with "What I did NOT check" (security → /security-review, runtime perf, flaky detection). Opt-in flags `--verify-build`, `--mutation-test`, `--reconcile`, `--apply-safe`. Public-skill posture — zero auto-install, graceful skip on missing native tools.
SmartACE (Agentic Context Engineering) workflow engine with MCP-B (Master Client Bridge) and AMUM-QCI-ETHIC module. Dual database architecture using DuckDB (analytics) + SurrealDB (graph). Uses Blender 5.0 (bpy) and UE5 Remote Control. Use when (1) MCP-B agent-to-agent communication (INQC protocol), (2) AMUM 3→6→9 progressive alignment, (3) QCI quantum coherence states, (4) ETHIC principles enforcement (Marcel/Anthropic/EU AI Act), (5) SurrealDB graph relationships, (6) DuckDB SQL workflows, (7) ML inference with infera/vss, (8) Blender 5.0 headless processing, (9) UE5 scene control, (10) DuckLake time travel.
AI-enhanced LaTeX Example Intelligent Generator, achieving organic integration of AI and hard-coding. AI handles "semantic understanding" (analyzing chapter themes, inferring resource relevance, generating coherent narratives), while hard-coding is responsible for "structure protection" (format validation, hash verification, access control). It applies to scenarios where users request "filling example content/generating examples/supplementing LaTeX examples".