Loading...
Loading...
Found 868 Skills
Walden History narrates a Walden repository's past from git history: feature chronicles built from frontmatter transitions, the product story of eras and supersessions, rework reports measuring churn after approvals, and the retirement ceremony for superseded specifications. Use when the user asks how a feature evolved, for a spec timeline or contract history, for rework or churn analysis, for the portfolio's story, or to retire superseded specs from `.walden/specs/`.
Design and author structured technical proposals, responsive artifacts, architecture diagrams, Mermaid charts, and interactive components. Use when creating standalone markdown reports, architectural specifications, Mermaid diagrams, or interactive artifact widgets — even if the user does not explicitly say "fable-artifact" (e.g. "create an artifact", "draw an architecture diagram", "write a technical proposal", "generate a mermaid flowchart"). Do NOT use for quick one-line conversational answers.
Create an llms.txt file from scratch based on repository structure following the llms.txt specification at https://llmstxt.org/
Prompt and workflow for generating conventional commit messages using a structured XML format. Guides users to create standardized, descriptive commit messages in line with the Conventional Commits specification, including instructions, examples, and validation.
Check whether an implementation matches its source specification and agreed decisions.
Documentation knowledge correctness validation. Inspect whether the technical descriptions in OpenHarmony API documentation are consistent with authoritative standards and specifications (W3C, CSS, etc.), mathematical definitions, or industry facts. When a knowledge issue is found, further compare it against the implementation code to distinguish a "documentation error," a "code implementation error," or an inconsistency across all three. Trigger phrases: documentation description validation, documentation knowledge correctness, whether a description is accurate, parameter description validation, documentation correction, and documentation-to-code comparison.
This skill should be used when the user asks to "validate API spec", "check OpenAPI spec", "lint OAS", "review API specification", "convert RAML to OAS", or mentions validating, checking, or reviewing OpenAPI/OAS/Swagger/RAML specifications against best practices.
Verify complex code changes against independent mathematical oracles, derived specifications, headless browser environments, and isolated sandbox states. Use when deriving independent verification oracles, testing algorithms against reference models, verifying UI with headless browsers, or testing state transitions in sandboxes — even if the user does not explicitly say "fable-simulator" (e.g. "simulate this workflow", "verify with an independent oracle", "headless browser check", "derive a test oracle"). Do NOT use for simple unit test runs (use fable-verify).
Author and validate Neo4j Ontology Graph Specification (ontology graph spec) documents. Use when writing or editing an ontology, defining nodes and relationships with properties, Neo4jType data types, constraints (key/unique/must_exist), labels, and endpoint cardinality, in YAML or JSON, or validating an ontology document against the live-resolved spec schema. Does NOT handle Cypher or loading an ontology into a database — use neo4j-cypher-skill. Does NOT cover generic graph data modeling advice — use neo4j-modeling-skill.
Read, write, and edit EPUB2/EPUB3 ebooks as an EPUB file format expert. Extract text, metadata, structure, and knowledge from EPUB files for enrichment or memory. Create valid EPUBs from scratch. Validate against the EPUB specification. Use when the user mentions epub, ebook, EPUB file, ebook format, read epub, write epub, create ebook, extract from epub, epub to text, or ebook structure. Do not use this skill for unrelated requests; route to the nearest named specialist.
Evaluate project specifications at inception (Step One), deterministically assess Scale & Load, Domain Decoupling, and Resource Intensity vectors, and automatically enforce a distributed Microservices Architecture when warranted, preventing monolith scaffolding.
Perform an independent, evidence-grounded review of git diffs against requested specifications, architectural invariants, and code standards. Use when reviewing pull requests, inspecting code changes before merge, auditing diffs for regressions, or performing pre-commit sanity reviews — even if the user does not explicitly say "fable-review" (e.g. "review this diff", "check this PR", "critique my changes", "code review this branch"). Do NOT use for implementing fixes directly (use fable-tdd/fable-execute) or executing tests (use fable-verify).