Loading...
Loading...
Found 545 Skills
Coordinate a cross-functional star-team workflow (Product Manager, Principal Engineer, Backend, Frontend, QA/Security, DevOps) with mandatory architecture and code-review checkpoints. Use when a request needs end-to-end product delivery, multi-role collaboration, or explicit role-based outputs (PM/PE/Backend/Frontend/QA/DevOps), or when the user asks for "star team", "cross-functional", "full lifecycle", or "multi-role" planning.
Writing maintainable code - readability principles, SOLID patterns applied pragmatically, and the judgment to know when rules should bendUse when "code quality, clean code, readability, naming, SOLID, refactor, code review, best practices, maintainable, how should I structure, clean-code, solid, readability, maintainability, code-review, naming, functions, principles" mentioned.
This skill should be used when writing or reviewing Swift code for iOS or macOS projects. Apply modern Swift 6+ best practices, concurrency patterns, API design guidelines, and migration strategies. Covers async/await, actors, MainActor, Sendable, typed throws, and Swift 6 breaking changes. Keywords: concurrency, async-await, actors, Sendable, typed-throws, Swift-6, migration, data-races, MainActor, nonisolated, isolated, iOS, macOS, SwiftUI, Combine, Swift-concurrency, actor-isolation, strict-concurrency, Swift-migration, modern-Swift, Swift-evolution, code-review, Swift-patterns, Apple-platforms, Xcode, iOS-development, macOS-development
Code review practices with technical rigor and verification gates. Use for receiving feedback, requesting code-reviewer subagent reviews, or preventing false completion claims in pull requests.
· Run combined code-review, anti-slop, security-audit, and update-docs pass. Triggers: 'full review', 'review everything', 'audit this repo', 'full check', 'run all checks'. Not for single-dimension audits.
Generate a single-file interactive HTML code-review artifact for a GitHub PR. Fetches the diff via the gh CLI, performs an honest severity-coded self-review, and renders an artifact with: collapsible per-file diffs with colored inline annotations, severity filter chips, per-finding checkboxes, and a "Create feedback prompt" modal that aggregates the checked items into a paste-ready follow-up prompt ending with "Please address this feedback. Address each individual item in its own conventional commit." Use this skill whenever the user wants to review a pull request visually, asks for an HTML or static review artifact, says "review PR", "review this PR", "build a PR review", wants color-coded findings, feedback aggregation, or a review file they can share — even if they don't explicitly say "HTML". Also trigger on "code review artifact", "interactive review", "feedback prompt for a PR", or when the user mentions reviewing a specific PR number.
Detect AI-generated code patterns ("slop") in PHP/Laravel and TypeScript/React source — comment narration, generic naming, premature interfaces, defensive overdose, mock-everything tests, and the absence of human "scars". Use when reviewing AI-assisted PRs, auditing code for taste/quality (not metrics — that's technical-debt), or hardening a code-review checklist. Triggers on "review for AI slop", "find AI patterns", "check code feels human", "audit code-quality taste".
Automate 7-phase feature development with specialized agents (code-explorer, code-architect, code-reviewer). Use for multi-file features, architectural decisions, or encountering ambiguous requirements, integration patterns, design approach errors.
AI-powered code review using CodeRabbit. Default code-review skill. Trigger for any explicit review request AND autonomously when the agent thinks a review is needed (code/PR/quality/security).
Refresh stale learning docs and pattern docs under docs/solutions/ by reviewing them against the current codebase, then updating, consolidating, replacing, or deleting the drifted ones. Trigger this skill when the user asks to refresh, audit, sweep, clean up, or consolidate stale docs in docs/solutions/ (phrases like "refresh my learnings", "audit docs/solutions/", "clean up stale learnings", "consolidate overlapping docs", "compound refresh", "/ce-compound-refresh"), or when ce-compound has just captured a new learning and flagged a specific older doc in docs/solutions/ as now inaccurate or superseded — invoke with the narrow scope hint ce-compound provides. Also trigger when the user points at a specific learning or pattern doc under docs/solutions/ and calls it stale, outdated, overlapping, or drifted. Do not trigger for general refactor, migration, debugging, or code-review work unless the user has explicitly directed attention to docs/solutions/ itself.
Luban - Skill Polishing Workshop. Transform a "usable Skill" into a public Skill asset that is "understandable, installable, shareable, verifiable, and continuously evolvable". The methodology consists of five craftsman-like steps: 1. Material Inspection: First challenge whether the premise of this Skill is valid; directly state if the "material" is not worth polishing. 2. Peer Research: Search for similar Skills online to clarify its position in the ecosystem. 3. Dimension Measurement: Evaluate using three metrics - structure, actual testing, and live verification (live verification means reconciling with real running outputs; a green CI can be deceptive). 4. Iterative Refinement: Freeze the original version as a baseline; only retain changes that pass the verification gate, otherwise revert. Try to institutionalize verification methods as tools and rules in the repository. 5. Post-Release Iteration: Release is not the end; maintain a benchmark observation list, and start the next iteration based on real feedback. This tool is used when users want to upgrade, optimize, polish, productize, or release their self-developed Skills. The final deliverables include a structured Skill Polishing Report, directly replaceable rewritten segments, and a shareable "Graduation Certificate" result card that can be screenshot. Trigger phrases include but are not limited to: "Let Luban take a look at this skill", "Polish at Luban's Workshop", "Polish my skill", "Upgrade my skill", "Optimize this skill", "Skill check-up", "Skill audit", "Productize my skill", "How to release this skill", "Benchmark against similar skills", "Why no one installs my skill", "Help me publish my skill to GitHub/ClawHub", "Improve SKILL.md". Even if users only provide a Skill directory, GitHub repository link, or a segment of SKILL.md saying "Help me figure out how to modify it", it should be triggered as long as the context is about making the Skill more usable and shareable. Do NOT use this for creating a new Skill from scratch (use skill-creator), regular code review (use code-review), or rewriting ordinary prompts unrelated to Skill assets.
WHEN: Performance analysis, bundle size optimization, rendering, Core Web Vitals, code splitting WHAT: Bundle analysis + large dependency detection + re-render issues + useMemo/useCallback suggestions + LCP/FID/CLS improvements WHEN NOT: Code quality → code-reviewer, Security → security-scanner