Loading...
Loading...
Found 7 Skills
Diagnose and guide revisions in non-fiction books. Use for non-fiction book revision, when arguments feel weak, evidence is outdated, readers report confusion, thesis is unclear, or book structure has problems. Keywords: non-fiction, revision, thesis, argument, evidence, structure.
This skill should be used when recognizing recurring themes, identifying patterns in work or data, or when "pattern", "recurring", or "repeated" are mentioned. For implementation, see codify skill.
Constructive critique through 5 HackerNews commenter personas with evidence-based claim validation. Use when user wants devil's advocacy, stress testing, or critical review of ideas, docs, architecture, or code. Use for "roast", "critique this", "poke holes", "devil's advocate", "stress test", or "what's wrong with". Do NOT use for code review (use systematic-code-review), implementation changes, or performance profiling without a specific critique request.
Investigar questões técnicas em fontes primárias, código-fonte, padrões e experimentos reproduzíveis, produzindo síntese rastreável com fato, inferência e lacuna separados. Use quando uma decisão depende de comportamento real de API, comparação de tecnologias ou fato tecnicamente incerto; salve a pesquisa somente no local autorizado pela spec do projeto consumidor, nunca em `research.md` paralelo.
Check the evidence, biases, alternative explanations, and reporting boundaries required for research conclusions before implementation or submission. Use when the user asks for “review my research design”, “act as a strict reviewer”, “challenge this conclusion”, or requests the rw-research-referee workflow. Runs without a private local workspace or preset research-lab; use user-provided material and bundled public-source methods.
Execute complete FPF cycle from hypothesis generation to decision
Use when a fix or a finding needs proof: re-checking behavior after a change, confirming a blocker is really gone, or turning collected evidence into a scoped launch verdict. It re-runs the original evidence, records what changed, and separates verified, unverified, and review-required items. Do not use it to declare a site legally compliant, or as a substitute for the specialist that found the problem.