Loading...
Loading...
Found 185 Skills
Use to detect and remove cognitive biases from reasoning. Invoke when prediction feels emotional, stuck at 50/50, or when you want to validate forecasting process. Use when user mentions scout mindset, soldier mindset, bias check, reversal test, scope sensitivity, or cognitive distortions.
Technical spike and research investigation specialist. Use when exploring options for a technical decision, conducting timeboxed investigations, or evaluating technology choices.
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.
Think beyond immediate consequences to understand the chain reactions of decisions. Master Howard Marks' investment framework for seeing what others miss. Use when: **Strategic decisions** where long-term consequences matter; **Policy/rule changes** that will trigger behavioral responses; **Competitive moves** to anticipate market reactions; **Product decisions** where user behavior may shift; **Investment analysis** to see past obvious conclusions
Interview the user relentlessly about a plan or design until reaching shared understanding, resolving each branch of the decision tree. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan, get grilled on their design, or mentions "ask me questions".
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.
Use historical analogies to inform strategic decisions by identifying structural similarities and differences between past and present situations. Use this skill when the user draws on historical precedent to justify a strategy, needs to evaluate whether a historical comparison is valid, or wants to learn from past events — even if they say 'this is like the dotcom bubble', 'history repeats itself', or 'what can we learn from how X handled this'.
Apply Upper Echelons Theory (Hambrick and Mason, 1984) to analyze how top management team characteristics — demographics, experiences, values — shape strategic choices and organizational outcomes. Use this skill when the user needs to evaluate TMT composition effects on strategy, predict strategic direction from leadership profiles, assess whether managerial discretion enables or constrains executive influence, or when they ask 'does leadership background matter for strategy', 'how does TMT composition affect decisions', or 'why did this management team make that choice'.
Apply real options analysis to value managerial flexibility embedded in investment decisions. Use this skill when the user needs to evaluate projects with significant uncertainty and flexibility, assess the value of deferring or expanding investments, compare traditional NPV with expanded NPV, or when they ask 'should we wait to invest', 'what is the option to abandon worth', or 'why does NPV undervalue this project'.
Help users make better decisions between competing options. Use when someone is weighing pros and cons, comparing alternatives, struggling with a difficult choice, deciding between speed and quality, or asking "should we do X or Y?"
Use when stakeholders have conflicting priorities and need alignment, suspect decision blind spots from single perspective, need to pressure-test proposals before presenting, want empathy for different viewpoints (eng vs PM vs legal vs user), building consensus across functions, evaluating tradeoffs with multi-dimensional impact, or when user mentions "what would X think", "stakeholder alignment", "see from their perspective", "blind spots", or "conflicting interests".
Run a simulated meeting with multiple expert personas to analyze a subject from diverse perspectives, reach a decision, and propose a solution before implementation. Optionally posts the meeting analysis to a linked GitLab or GitHub issue.