Loading...
Loading...
Found 22 Skills
Analyzes fundamental questions and concepts through philosophical lens using logic, epistemology, metaphysics, and critical analysis frameworks. Provides insights on meaning, truth, knowledge, existence, reasoning, and conceptual clarity. Use when: Conceptual ambiguity, logical arguments, foundational assumptions, meaning questions. Evaluates: Validity, soundness, coherence, assumptions, implications, conceptual clarity.
Socratic questioning to examine beliefs, uncover assumptions, and develop deeper understanding. Use to challenge thinking, evaluate proposals, or teach without lecturing.
Deep Reading Collaborative System: A system leveraging multi-layered AI Agents to help transform articles from "read" to "understood" to "mastered", and convert knowledge into actionable plans. Use this system when you need to deeply understand complex articles/papers, systematically organize reading notes, think critically about content, discover hidden logical issues and assumptions, or turn knowledge into action plans. Trigger keywords: deep reading, critical thinking, reading notes, article analysis, Socratic questioning, action plan
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.
Calibrated grilling session for stress-testing a plan, design, idea, or decision. First assesses the user's topic knowledge, confidence, and desired pressure level, then asks one question at a time with recommended answers. Use when user says "grill me", "stress-test this", "challenge my plan", "interview me", or wants a plan probed without being overwhelmed.
Apply a structured judgment and discernment framework to any high-stakes decision, recommendation, or AI-generated output. Use this skill whenever the user wants to think more carefully before committing to something — a people decision, a strategic call, a piece of writing they're about to send, or an AI output they're not sure whether to trust. Trigger on phrases like "is this right?", "am I confident about this?", "help me think this through", "run the discernment framework", "judgment check", "calibration check", "am I being overconfident", "should I trust this output", "premortem", or any time someone is wrestling with whether their thinking is sound. Also trigger proactively when someone appears to be accepting a claim, recommendation, or AI-generated output without questioning it — especially on high-stakes topics like hiring, restructuring, or communications that will reach many people.
Socratic coach for breaking down problems to fundamental truths. Use when users want to think through a problem deeply, challenge assumptions, or find innovative solutions. Triggers on requests like "help me think through this", "let's break this down", "what are my blind spots", "I'm stuck on a problem", "challenge my assumptions", or explicit requests for first-principles thinking.
Devil's advocate. Seek contrary evidence before locking in. Use when about to make a significant decision, when confidence is high but stakes are higher, or when the team is converging too quickly.
Apply Hegelian dialectics (thesis-antithesis-synthesis) to analyze contradictions and generate higher-order understanding. Use this skill when the user needs to resolve opposing viewpoints, find creative synthesis between conflicting positions, or move past binary thinking — even if they say 'both sides have valid points', 'how do we reconcile these views', or 'is there a third option'.
Adversarially test a thesis or take for differentiation, robustness, and blind spots. Prevents publishing consensus as contrarian and surfaces what would change your mind.
Produces structured judgment briefs for contested situations — news events, decisions, conflicts, strategy questions. Surfaces hidden bets, real disagreements, unspeakable truths, and who concretely pays. Use when the user wants sharper thinking about something messy, not a summary.
Challenge ideas, assumptions, and decisions by playing devil's advocate to identify weaknesses and prevent groupthink