Loading...
Loading...
Found 18 Skills
Use when challenging ideas, plans, decisions, or proposals using structured critical reasoning. Invoke to play devil's advocate, run a pre-mortem, red team, or audit evidence and assumptions.
Stress-test plans, proposals, and strategies. Use for pre-mortems, assumption audits, risk registers, evaluating business ideas, identifying failure modes, or when you need devil's advocate analysis before committing resources.
Use when exploring alternative scenarios, testing assumptions through "what if" questions, understanding causal relationships, conducting pre-mortem analysis, stress testing decisions, or when user mentions counterfactuals, hypothetical scenarios, thought experiments, alternative futures, what-if analysis, or needs to challenge assumptions and explore possibilities.
Use before launching products or signing contracts, when needing to combat sunk cost fallacy, or when standard pre-mortems fail to change behavior
Full discovery phase orchestrator. Brainstorm + ao search + research + plan + pre-mortem gate. Produces epic-id and execution-packet for /crank. Triggers: "discovery", "discover", "explore and plan", "research and plan", "discovery phase".
Challenges AI-generated plans, code, designs, and decisions before you commit. Pairs with any other skill as a review layer. Uses pre-mortem analysis, inversion thinking, and Socratic questioning to find what AI missed — blind spots, hidden assumptions, failure modes, and optimistic shortcuts. The skill that asks "are you sure about that?" so you don't have to. Triggers on: "challenge this", "devils advocate", "stress test this plan", "what could go wrong", "poke holes in this", "review this critically", "second opinion on this design", "what am I missing". Use this skill when you need critical review of any AI-generated output, architecture decision, implementation plan, or code before committing to it.
Full RPI lifecycle orchestrator. Research → Plan → Pre-mortem → Crank → Vibe → Post-mortem. One command, sequential skill invocations with human gates and hands-free validation. Triggers: "rpi", "full lifecycle", "end to end", "research to production".
Run a pre-mortem risk analysis on a PRD or launch plan. Categorizes risks as Tigers (real problems), Paper Tigers (overblown concerns), and Elephants (unspoken worries), then classifies as launch-blocking, fast-follow, or track. Use when preparing for launch, stress-testing a product plan, or identifying what could go wrong.
A deterministic thinking partner that challenges assumptions and applies mental models to sharpen decisions, solve problems, and think more clearly. Use this skill whenever a user says "help me think through X", "challenge my thinking", "what am I missing", "apply mental models to this", "play devil's advocate", "stress test this idea", "poke holes in my plan", "help me decide between X and Y", "what are the second-order effects", "I'm stuck on a decision", names any specific model (SWOT, first principles, inversion, pre-mortem, etc.), or asks for structured reasoning on any ambiguous, high-stakes, or complex problem. Also trigger when the user seems uncertain, is rationalizing, or is asking "am I thinking about this right?" Even casual phrases like "what do you think about..." on non-trivial topics should trigger this skill.
Before ANY significant development task (new feature, refactor, integration, migration), run a complete planning ritual by orchestrating other skills in sequence: rubber-duck (clarify scope) -> pre-mortem (assess risks) -> eta (estimate time) -> final confirmation. Do not start coding until the battle plan is approved.
Push the LLM to reconsider, refine, and improve its recent output. Use when user asks for deeper critique or mentions a known deeper critique method, e.g. socratic, first principles, pre-mortem, red team.
Annie Duke's Decision Quality framework applied to a business decision. Spawns a team of specialist agents — Resulting Auditor, Calibrator, Pre-Mortem Analyst, Quit Strategist, Process Architect — who each apply a distinct lens from Duke's framework to evaluate whether a decision is sound regardless of outcome. The lead synthesizes into a stacking analysis: which biases are operating, which process flaws exist, and the honest Duke verdict. Use when the user says "duke this", "is this a good bet", "should I quit", "evaluate this decision", or faces any high-stakes choice under uncertainty and wants rigorous decision-process analysis. Works as a standalone analysis or after /office-hours.