Loading...
Loading...
Found 282 Skills
Use after zanahoria-multi-assumptions has filed N parallel issue variants AND @coderabbitai has responded to all of them — closes the family by extracting the load-bearing assumption, naming a winner, capturing the decision as an ADR, and cleanly closing the rejected variants with cross-referenced reasoning. Triggers on close-the-family, pick-a-winner, commit-the-decision, decide-variants, after-CR-responds, zanahoria-decisions.
System Architect Specialist. Use this to design system architecture, creating C4 models and ADRs (Decision Records).
Read a story file and implement it. Loads the full context (story, GDD requirement, ADR guidelines, control manifest), routes to the right programmer agent for the system and engine, implements the code and test, and confirms each acceptance criterion. The core implementation skill — run after /story-readiness, before /code-review and /story-done.
Evidence-grounded to-be design (ADRs + design doc) and an implementation orchestration plan (a machine-readable task ledger). Activates when the user asks to design a target state, plan the work, or produce a task plan for a goal.
Crea documentos técnicos organizados en /docs (specs, planes, ADRs, referencias). Usa cuando el usuario diga "crear documento", "escribir spec", "documentar esto", "creame una spec", "escribime documentación", "hacer documentación", o quiera agregar documentación al proyecto.
ADR format and methodology for documenting significant technical decisions with context, alternatives considered, and consequences. Use when making or documenting architectural decisions.
Weighted decision scoring framework for architectural and technology choices. Frames decisions with 2-4 options, scores against weighted criteria, detects close calls, and records decisions in the active ADR or task plan. Use when: "should I use X or Y", "which approach", "compare options", "trade-offs between", "help me decide", "evaluate alternatives"
Use when the user needs system design, architecture decision records, scalability analysis, trade-off evaluation, or non-functional requirements planning. Triggers: new system design, technology selection, scaling strategy, ADR creation, infrastructure topology, service boundary definition.
Document finalized technology selections, architecture decisions, long-term constraints, and coding conventions in the project into searchable permanent documents. No one will remember why X was chosen six months later, but with decision documents, at least the background can be understood before making changes next time. Four types: tech-stack (which tools/libraries/frameworks to use), architecture (how the system is organized), constraint (what is not allowed), convention (what is uniformly done). Trigger scenarios: Proactively push when important choices are made after feature-design or issue-analyze, or when the user says "record decision", "archive technology selection", "ADR", "record this constraint", "write down the convention". Only archive finalized decisions; do not archive under-discussion solutions.
Guided, section-by-section authoring of the master architecture document for the game. Reads all GDDs, the systems index, existing ADRs, and the engine reference library to produce a complete architecture blueprint before any code is written. Engine-version-aware: flags knowledge gaps and validates decisions against the pinned engine version.
Finds all REFACTOR markers in codebase, validates associated ADRs exist, identifies stale markers (30+ days old), and detects orphaned markers (no ADR reference). Use during status checks, before feature completion, or for refactor health audits. Triggers on "check refactor status", "marker health", "what's the status", or PROACTIVELY before marking features complete. Works with Python (.py), TypeScript (.ts), and JavaScript (.js) files using grep patterns to locate markers and validate against ADR files in docs/adr/ directories.
Helps engineering managers break down knowledge silos and build sustainable documentation and collaboration practices — produces a four-root-cause diagnostic for silos, an Engineering Guilds framework, a minimum-viable documentation approach using ADRs, a structured onboarding model, and a cross-team request decision framework. Use when the user says "knowledge silos," "reinventing the wheel," "nobody reads docs," "onboarding is bad," "teams don't talk," "documentation culture," "cross-team friction," "information doesn't flow," or "new hires struggle to ramp up."