Loading...
Loading...
Found 1,546 Skills
Generate new Webflow Code Component boilerplate with React component, definition file, and optional styling. Automatically checks prerequisites and can set up missing config/dependencies.
Transform research interests into definable, searchable, falsifiable, and executable research questions. Use when the user asks for "help me formulate research questions", "is this topic feasible", "turn my interest into an RQ", or requests the rw-research-question workflow. Runs without a private local workspace or preset research-lab; use user-provided material and bundled public-source methods.
You MUST use this when writing or editing prose anywhere in a project (docs, READMEs, marketing copy, commit messages) and when asked to audit, score, or clean up negative parallelism, the "it's not just X, it's Y" construction. It bans defining things by negation-plus-contrast in favor of direct positive statements and grades a project's compliance on a 0-100 scale.
Facilitates the fourth step of a proven ideal-customer (ICP) method: refining classified weaknesses into deal-breakers — the circumstances that disqualify the product outright, no matter how well everything else fits — and mapping the anti-market segments who therefore will never buy. Takes the weaknesses from a strengths chart (W1, W2, …) plus a keystones file (K1, K2, …), walks the weaknesses one at a time, records deal-breakers with their anti-market segments in DEALBREAKERS.md (D1, D2, …), then HONES the keystones: appending the qualifiers each deal-breaker forces ('…processing at least $5,000/mo'), editing KEYSTONES.md under its frozen numbers with a change log. Load when the user has keystones and weaknesses and asks who will never buy, what their anti-market is, or 'run the deal-breakers step.' Do NOT load to derive keystones from strengths (the previous step), to find inciting events (the next step), or to write the final ideal-customer definition.
Facilitates the fifth step of a proven ideal-customer (ICP) method: mapping inciting events — the specific trigger moments that move a perfect-fit customer from could-buy-someday to buying-today. Takes a keystones file (K1, K2, … with market segments) and, when available, customer-interview findings; walks the keystones one at a time, harvesting real trigger stories from interview evidence (marked observed) and working backward through brainstorm lenses — crises, seasonal cycles, strategic windows, personal life-changes — for the rest (marked hypothesized), recording each event with the keystone it couples to and how to find prospects in that condition, in INCITING-EVENTS.md (E1, E2, …). Load when the user has keystones and asks what makes customers buy now, what triggers a purchase, or 'run the inciting-events step.' Do NOT load to derive keystones or deal-breakers (previous steps), to write the final ideal-customer definition (next step), or to write the ads themselves.
Facilitates the final step of a proven customer-interview method: distilling everything a round of interviews produced (GOALS.md, HYPOTHESES.md, QUESTIONS.md, and a directory of per-interview debriefs) into a single FINAL-REPORT.md the whole company can use. Top: a summary as brief as possible without losing salient information. Below: numbered findings (F1, F2, …) tagged validated / disproved / directional / watch / untested, every one citing debriefs and quoting customers verbatim, plus per-area briefs that marshal the evidence for ideal-customer definition, positioning, pricing, marketing & sales, and product priorities. Load when the user says 'write up what we found from the interviews,' 'summarize the interview results for the team,' or 'turn the interviews into a report.' Do NOT load for updating hypotheses from interviews (the synthesis step), for recording one conversation (the debrief step), or for actually doing the positioning, ideal-customer, or pricing work the report feeds.
Facilitates the third step of a proven ideal-customer (ICP) method: refining classified strengths into keystones — the specific characteristics, behaviors, or circumstances that make a customer NEED an extreme version of a strength, badly enough to drive the purchase alone. Takes a strengths chart (S1, S2, … — file or pasted), walks the strengths one at a time asking who requires an extreme version of each, gates every candidate on naming a real market segment that typifies it (no segment = table stakes, cut), and records survivors in KEYSTONES.md (K1, K2, … with [S] references and example segments). Delivers the strategic verdict when few or none survive: the product isn't compelling yet. Load when the user has classified strengths and asks who needs them, who their target market is, or 'turn our strengths into keystones.' Do NOT load to classify strengths and weaknesses (the previous step), to derive deal-breakers or the anti-market (the next step), or to write the final ideal-customer definition (later).
Converts marketing copy — headlines, ads, homepage claims, pitches, positioning statements — into value-first, vivid language: reframes save-time/save-money pitches as create-more-value pitches in the currency the customer measures value, fits each claim to the right level of the customer's needs (features at your level, the promise one level up, aspirations referenced but never promised, obviated steps bragged about), keeps every claim consistent with the declared pricing strategy (More for More, More for Less, or Less for Less), and forces specificity — no generic words, no clichés, show-don't-tell, real numbers only, claims passing the Opposite Test. Works one message at a time, recording survivors in POSITIONING.md. Sharper with an ideal-customer definition and a needs stack; works without. Load when the user wants marketing copy, positioning, headlines, or a pitch rewritten, sharpened, or audited. Do NOT load to build the needs stack or define the ideal customer — upstream steps this skill consumes.
Whole site or product — a full web accessibility (a11y) audit against WCAG 2.2, following the WCAG-EM methodology. Defines scope, samples representative pages and flows, runs the automated tier (`accessibility-scan`) and the hands-on manual tier (`accessibility-inspect`), and produces one conformance report. Grades each finding by severity and evidence basis, and states per-criterion conformance as pass, fail, or undetermined (needs a human). Use it for 'audit my site for accessibility', 'is this product accessible', 'a11y audit', 'WCAG or Section 508 conformance report', or any multi-page assessment. Assesses; does not fix (use `accessibility-fix`) or diff (use `accessibility-diff`). For a single page use `accessibility-scan`; for hands-on keyboard and screen-reader checks use `accessibility-inspect`.
Architecture-aware feature scaffolding for .NET 10 projects. Detects the project's architecture (VSA, Clean Architecture, DDD, Modular Monolith) and generates complete feature slices with all required layers: endpoint, handler, validator, DTOs, EF configuration, and integration tests — with the completeness checklist and per-architecture code templates every generated feature must satisfy. Use when: "scaffold", "create feature", "add feature", "new endpoint", "generate", "add entity", "scaffold a module", "add module", or when customizing generation templates or defining what a complete feature slice includes.
Use when streaming durable workflow updates to a UI in real time — live order status pages that animate as steps complete, AI agent token streaming from a function to the browser, log tailing for long-running jobs, or human-in-the-loop approval flows that publish a prompt and wait for a user reply. Covers Inngest v4 native realtime: defining typed channels, publishing from inside step.run, minting subscription tokens via server actions, and consuming the stream from React/Next.js client components.
Canonical patterns for writing custom MSBuild targets. USE FOR: diagnosing and fixing custom target authoring anti-patterns; broken SDK target chains across files (e.g., Directory.Build.targets silently redefining SDK targets); targets that replace CompileDependsOn instead of extending it with $(CompileDependsOn); query targets returning stale results from Outputs vs Returns misuse; missing Inputs/Outputs causing unnecessary rebuilds; missing FileWrites registration. Covers DependsOnTargets vs BeforeTargets vs AfterTargets, the Build→CoreBuild three-level pattern, and the $(XxxDependsOn) chain-extension pattern. DO NOT USE FOR: incremental build tuning (use incremental-build), parallelization (use build-parallelism), general anti-patterns (use msbuild-antipatterns), non-MSBuild build systems.