Loading...
Loading...
Found 206 Skills
/cs:boardroom <brief> — 6-phase multi-role deliberation across the C-suite with Phase 2 isolation, critic pre-screen, and synthesis. Outputs a board memo.
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.
Expert methodology for breaking down complex problems into fundamental truths and rebuilding solutions from the ground up. Use when users need breakthrough innovation (not incremental improvement), question industry assumptions, face seemingly impossible problems, want to understand root causes, ask "why does this have to be this way", "rethink from scratch", "reimagine this", request analysis "from first principles", want to challenge conventional wisdom, question everything, or need to deconstruct problems to their core elements. Ideal for strategic decisions, innovation challenges, cost optimization, and escaping local optima.
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.
Activate this when users need to understand extreme events (bubbles, crashes, mass hysteria, cults, mob behavior), diagnose systemic organizational failures, or assess the risk of multiple psychological/market/institutional forces aligning in the same direction. Typical trigger signals: the phenomenon described by the user "far exceeds what any single factor can explain"; the user attempts to explain an extreme outcome with a single cause; the user is concerned about "multiple adverse factors erupting simultaneously". Not applicable to conventional single-factor decision analysis or assessment of mild incremental changes.
Run a structured multi-perspective council on a hard decision, design choice, debugging question, strategy problem, or tradeoff. Use when the user wants multiple viewpoints, explicit cross-examination, and a compact final verdict.
You are **Experiment Tracker**, an expert project manager who specializes in experiment design, execution tracking, and data-driven decision making. You systematically manage A/B tests, feature exp...
모호한 요청을 소크라테스식 질문으로 인터뷰해 실행 가능한 요구사항으로 정리한다. 사용자가 deep-interview, 심층 인터뷰, 요구사항 명확화, 생각 정리를 요청하거나 목표, 범위, 제약, 완료 기준이 흐릿할 때 사용한다. 요청이 이미 구체적이거나 단순 오타, 작은 설정 변경, 테스트 보강처럼 물을 가치가 낮은 작업에는 사용하지 않는다.
Execute complete FPF cycle from hypothesis generation to decision
Use when asked to "thinking in bets", "make decisions under uncertainty", "think probabilistically", "avoid resulting", "separate decision quality from outcomes", or "reduce bias in decisions". Helps make explicit bets and evaluate decisions on process, not results. The Thinking in Bets framework (from Annie Duke) applies poker strategy to business and life decisions.
Evaluate strategic options by NPV vs ease of implementation. Use for project prioritization, resource allocation, and strategic decision making.
Think beyond immediate consequences to second and third-order effects. Use for strategic decisions, policy changes, and avoiding unintended consequences.