Loading...
Loading...
Found 36 Skills
Priority Judgment Assistant - Help users determine priorities from chaotic to-do items and figure out what to do right now. Triggered when users say "I have a lot of things to do", "Help me sort this out", "Set priorities", "What should I do today".
Assemble a panel of experts to assess a problem from multiple professional perspectives, surface agreement and disagreement, and deliver a chaired recommendation with clear tradeoffs. Use when the user wants multi-expert judgment, a second opinion, design critique, option comparison, or a recommendation backed by distinct expert viewpoints.
Use when facing complex decisions, architectural trade-offs, philosophical questions, or any problem requiring deep analysis before action. Use when the user asks to "think deeply", "question assumptions", "analyze from first principles", "challenge this decision", debates between two approaches (e.g. monolith vs microservices, build vs buy, SSR vs CSR), or invokes /socrates. Also triggered when other skills need a thinking engine for rigorous pre-analysis. Even if the problem seems simple, if there are hidden assumptions worth examining, this skill applies.
Multi-framework intelligence brief. Takes any business situation, investment thesis, career decision, or strategic problem and runs it through 4-7 of 11 analytical frameworks (Feynman, Kahneman, Shannon, Tetlock, Duke, Munger, Thiel, Helmer, Christensen, Meadows, Taleb, Bezos). Each framework runs as a distinct sub-analysis producing concrete claims. Contradictions between analyses are surfaced explicitly. Synthesizes into a single brief: Core Argument, Key Insight, load-bearing conditions, failure modes with numeric probabilities, validation tests, recommended action with sizing, and the strongest dissent. Use when the user says "think through this", "analyze this for me", "help me decide", "think", "/think", or presents any complex decision, investment thesis, business question, or strategic problem that warrants structured multi-framework analysis.
Research on Historical Isomorphism and Standard Answers. Abstract the complex dilemma the user is facing into a structural fingerprint, search for truly isomorphic successful cases, failed cases, and counterexamples in business history, management history, technology history, career history, and institutional history. Compare the constraints, decisions, and outcomes of the parties involved, and extract recurring solutions, applicable conditions, and failure boundaries. Trigger methods: /dbs-standard-answer, /标准答案 (Standard Answer), "Who faced similar problems in history?", "Has anyone encountered this situation before?", "How did they resolve it back then?", "Is there a classic solution to this problem?", "First help me find historical analogies?", "What was the standard answer in the past?". Find structurally analogous historical cases and evidence-backed standard answers. Use when the user wants to situate a current dilemma in history, compare how others addressed it, and extract recurring mechanisms with conditions and limits.
Charlie Munger's Mental Lattice applied to a business idea. Spawns a team of specialist agents — Mathematician, Psychologist, Inverter, Economist, Moat Analyst — who each apply their discipline's elementary models to the idea. The lead synthesizes into a lollapalooza analysis: which forces stack, which fight you, and the honest Munger verdict. Use when the user says "munger this", "apply the lattice", "what would Charlie think", or proposes a business idea and wants multidisciplinary analysis. Works as a standalone analysis or after /office-hours.
Restaurant recommendations / What to eat / Where to eat / Coffee, bars, desserts, late-night snacks. For users asking questions like "What's good to eat nearby? / Restaurant recommendations / What's the average cost per person? / What time do you close? / Do I need a reservation? / Suitable for families or treating guests?" etc. By default, provide a "query time snapshot" (local time) and source links; do not fabricate restaurant names, addresses, business hours, average cost per person, or ratings; if information is insufficient, first ask 2-3 key questions.
Use when you want to improve response quality through meta-cognitive reasoning. Applies 15+ reasoning methods to reconsider and refine initial outputs.
Use for decision-grade Abel causal reads: explain what is driving a market or company node, how two nodes connect, what changes under intervention, or how a real-world choice looks when routed through Abel proxy signals. Use when user says "Abel" or "causal" or "causality" or "drivers" or "what if" in the context of market, business, crypto, or proxy-routed questions.
Lance une réunion simulée avec plusieurs personas experts pour analyser un sujet sous des perspectives diverses, prendre une décision et proposer une solution avant implémentation. Peut optionnellement publier l'analyse de la réunion sur une issue GitLab ou GitHub liée.
Meta-cognitive decision support that analyzes current context and surfaces intelligent next-step options to the user. Use this skill when: (1) User explicitly invokes /checkpoint, (2) Significant work has been completed and a checkpoint is valuable, (3) Uncertainty or ambiguity exists about requirements or approach, (4) Task complexity has expanded beyond initial scope, (5) Before finalizing or committing to ensure nothing is missed. This skill pauses execution, assesses the situation holistically, and presents 2-5 contextually-appropriate options via AskUserQuestion, with a recommended option and rationale.
Request judgment from random humans when uncertain about subjective decisions. Crowdsourced opinions on tone, style, ethics, and reality checks. CRITICAL - Responses take minutes to hours (or may never arrive).