55 skills (repositories by testdouble) · sorted by popularity
OI-3 spike harness — ADVERSARIAL inline guidance variant. Worst-case anchor: ends with a final-sounding completion statement and gives NO instruction to return to the caller. Use only when a spike consumer skill invokes it.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
OI-3 spike harness — the INLINE (non-forked) readability-guidance variant. Surfaces the shared readability standard into the calling skill's own context. Use only when a spike consumer skill invokes it.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
OI-3 spike harness — the FORKED (context fork) readability-guidance variant. Same payload as the inline variant but declared to run in a forked context. Use only when a spike consumer skill invokes it.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Internal harness probe for the OI-3 readability-guidance spike. Use only when explicitly told to invoke spike-probe. Verifies that a freshly-created project skill renders into a subagent's context via the Skill tool.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
OI-3 spike harness — heavy consumer skill, INLINE arm. Builds an incident post-mortem and sources the readability standard mid-workflow via an inline (non-forked) guidance skill. Use only when explicitly invoked by the spike harness with a TRIAL_ID and data path.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Produces a human-readable, progressive-disclosure overview of unfamiliar code or a pull request's changes — why it exists (the real problem it solves or goal it serves for the business or a user), and from there what it does, how it flows, and where to start — so you can get up to speed before working on or reviewing it. Use when you want to understand, get oriented in, make sense of, explain, or get up to speed on a chunk of code, a file, a directory, a symbol, or a PR's changes. Writes the overview to a scratch file and changes no code. Does not review code quality or raise findings — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting them. Does not produce durable feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not assess architecture or structural risk — use architectural-analysis. Does not diagnose bugs or root-cause failures — use investigate. Does not pace a person through the code one step at a time in conversation — use code-walkthrough.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Generate a PR description from the current branch's changes against a GitHub PR, using the gh CLI. Use when writing, drafting, or updating pull request descriptions, PR summaries, or PR bodies. Does not review code or post review comments — use code-review for local review or post-code-review-to-pr for posting a review to GitHub.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Applies Han's shared Human-Readable Output Standard to a target you already have — a file on disk, text pasted into the prompt, or a draft already produced in the conversation — by dispatching the readability-editor to rewrite its prose so the main point comes first, headings are descriptive, each paragraph carries one idea, and sentences stay short and active, while preserving every fact. Use when you want to make a document or draft readable, edit or polish prose for readability, clean up writing, tighten wording, or re-apply the readability standard to something already written. Rewrites prose only, leaving code, diagrams, and citation identifiers unchanged. Does not write new feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not restructure code or review it — use refactor to restructure code and code-review to audit it. Does not judge the underlying work or raise findings; it only rewrites the writing.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Builds a feature specification from scratch with plan-a-feature and publishes it to a user-specified Confluence location, posting the spec as a parent page and each companion artifact (decision log, team findings, technical notes) as a child page beneath it. Use when the user wants a new feature planned, designed, scoped, or specified AND posted to a Confluence space or page. Requires a configured Atlassian MCP server. Does not plan to local files only — use plan-a-feature. Does not publish an arbitrary existing markdown file — use markdown-to-confluence. Does not refine or stress-test an existing plan — use iterative-plan-review. Does not document already-built features to Confluence — use project-documentation-to-confluence.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Surfaces Han's shared Human-Readable Output Standard — the readability rule and the writing-voice profile — into the calling skill's own context, so the caller drafts in voice and runs its self-check against the current standard sourced from one canonical copy. Use when a prose-producing skill needs the shared readability standard available in context before it drafts. Governs the shape of a written deliverable, where explanation-guidance governs what a run says to a person in a turn. Runs in the caller's context and hands control straight back; it does not produce a deliverable of its own, rewrite anything, or judge the caller's work. Does not run the adversarial rewrite pass — dispatch the readability-editor agent for that, or use edit-for-readability to rewrite an existing target. Does not cover explaining technical work to a reader who will not implement it — use explanation-guidance for that.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Performs deep architectural analysis of a specified module, directory, or feature area by examining structural coupling, data flow, concurrency patterns, risk, and SOLID alignment. Use when the user wants to assess, evaluate, or review the architecture, design quality, dependency structure, coupling, cohesion, or technical debt of an existing part of the codebase. Not for investigating specific bugs, runtime errors, or failures — use investigate. Not for test planning — use automated-test-planning. Not for file-level code review — use code-review. Not for researching open-ended options, prior art, or how something works — use research. Not for designing a new interface or contract — use design-an-api. Not for planning the change its findings imply — use plan-a-change. Not for discovering bounded contexts, ubiquitous language, or where code boundaries diverge from domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis. Not for writing documentation or architectural decision records.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Run a comprehensive code review on local source files. Use this skill when the user asks to review, audit, inspect, evaluate, or check code, even if they never use the word "review." Does not post comments to GitHub pull requests — use post-code-review-to-pr for that. Does not analyze architectural structure or module boundaries — use architectural-analysis for that. Does not explain code or a PR to build understanding before reviewing — use code-overview for a written overview, or code-walkthrough to be paced through it one step at a time. Does not map bounded contexts or domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis for that. Does not capture feedback on Han's own skills — use han-feedback for that.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Walks a person through code changes one step at a time in conversation, starting at the entry point and following the flow that changes, showing a small chunk per step and explaining it in plain language. Defaults to the current branch's changes, and walks the code from the perspective of any context provided instead — a file, directory, symbol, pull request, plan, or ticket. Use when someone wants to be walked through, taught, paced through, or shown around code or a branch step by step, or to learn how a change works before reviewing or extending it. Stops after every step and waits, so the learner sets the pace. Paces through code that already exists and builds nothing — to build new work while being paced through it, use pairing. Does not produce a written overview to read alone — use code-overview. Does not review code quality — use code-review. Does not diagnose bugs — use investigate.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Designs the contract for an API change inside one codebase — a component's props, a function surface, URL or query parameters, an event payload, or a module boundary — through a discovery pass, an options document with one recommendation, a question round, and an adversarial validation round, with every element of the contract justified from one stated goal. Use when you want to design, shape, decide, or nail down an interface, contract, signature, or API change for a capability you can already describe, sized for roughly one pull request. Produces a design document and changes no code. Does not specify what a feature should do — use plan-a-feature. Does not plan delivery or sequencing — use plan-implementation. Does not assess the architecture of existing code — use architectural-analysis. Does not write the code — use tdd. Does not restructure existing code — use refactor. Runs its rounds without pausing for review; to review each round as it lands, use pairing.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Runs an evidence-based investigation of a bug, failure, or unexpected behavior with investigate and publishes the resulting investigation report to a user-specified Confluence location. Use when the user wants something debugged, diagnosed, or root-caused AND the findings posted to a Confluence space or page. Requires a configured Atlassian MCP server. Does not investigate to a local file only — use investigate. Does not publish an arbitrary existing markdown file — use markdown-to-confluence. Does not document an already-understood feature to Confluence — use project-documentation-to-confluence. Does not plan or specify a new feature to Confluence — use plan-a-feature-to-confluence. Does not publish to Jira — use work-items-to-jira.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Surfaces Han's shared standard for explaining technical work to a reader who will not implement it into the calling skill's own context, so the caller writes its escalations, confirmation turns, and stops as a concrete outcome the reader could observe rather than as a mechanism. Use when a skill is about to ask a person a question, stop for an input, or explain a technical consequence to someone who will not open the code. Governs what a run says to a person in a turn, where readability-guidance governs the shape of a written deliverable. Runs in the caller's context and hands control straight back; it does not produce a deliverable of its own, rewrite anything, or judge the caller's work. Carries guidance only and adds no self-check step.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Write code through a disciplined, BDD-framed Test-Driven Development loop: build a behavior test list, then drive each behavior through red-green-refactor with an enforced observed-failure gate. Use when the user wants to implement, build, or write code test-first, "do TDD", follow "red-green-refactor", drive code from tests, choose the next test by the Transformation Priority Premise (TPP) or ZOMBIES ordering, or grow a feature behavior-by-behavior with tests leading. This skill writes and changes code; it does not produce a test plan document (use automated-test-planning, or manual-test-planning for a plan a person runs by hand), review or audit existing code (use code-review), restructure existing code outside a TDD loop (use refactor, or plan-a-change to plan a multi-module restructure), specify what a feature should do (use plan-a-feature), or find the root cause of a bug (use investigate). Runs its loop to completion without pausing for review; to review each behavior as it lands, use pairing.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Cut a Han release: update CHANGELOG.md with the changes since the last release, bump and tag every plugin that changed as {plugin-name}--v{version} so a version-constrained dependency can resolve, and publish a GitHub release crediting every merged pull request and closed issue to the people behind it. Use when releasing, cutting a release, shipping a new Han version, publishing release notes, or tagging a version. Always stops for approval before creating any tag, because a pushed tag is never moved. Requires the gh CLI, jq, the claude CLI, and a clean git checkout. This is a repository-maintenance skill for the Han repo itself, not a general review or PR skill — use code-review for local review, post-code-review-to-pr to post a PR review, and update-pr-description for PR bodies.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Restructure existing code without changing its behavior, through a test-gated refactoring loop: a named target, a green suite over that target before any edit, a planned sequence of small named refactorings, and the full suite re-run after every step. Use when the user wants to refactor, restructure, clean up, simplify, or improve the design of existing code, or to apply refactoring recommendations from a code-review or architectural-analysis report. This skill changes code; it does not review code (use code-review), assess architecture (use architectural-analysis), plan a multi-module restructure before executing it (use plan-a-change), map domain boundaries before restructuring along them (use ddd-analysis), or build new behavior test-first (use tdd). Do not use it on code inside an active tdd loop; the refactor step of tdd owns that cleanup. Runs its planned sequence to completion without pausing for review; to review each named refactoring as it lands, use pairing.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Discovers the core attributes of the current code repository and its projects — languages, frameworks, tooling, and where things live — and writes a concise reference section directly into the project's AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md for other skills, agents, and hooks to consume. Use when scanning, analyzing, or detecting the project's technology stack, build tools, or repository structure. Does not create or update project documentation — use project-documentation for writing feature or system docs.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Plans an architecture-driven change to code that already exists: module boundaries, type responsibilities, layering, coupling, and the public surface a revision moves. Produces a buildable change plan that names the types, modules, and methods involved and records the surface delta each change makes. Use when the user wants to plan, scope, or sequence a restructure, extraction, split, consolidation, responsibility shift, or API revision of existing code, including "these responsibilities are wrong, plan the fix". Does not assess an area and stop at findings — use architectural-analysis. Does not specify new behavior — use plan-a-feature. Does not diagnose a bug — use investigate. Does not write the code — use refactor to restructure it or tdd to build it.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Builds a feature specification from scratch through a relentless, evidence-based interview that walks the design tree decision-by-decision, resolving dependencies as it goes. Use when the user wants to plan, design, scope, specify, or flesh out a new feature, capability, or system behavior before implementation. Produces a feature specification focused on system behaviors, not implementation detail. Does not plan a restructure of code that already exists — use plan-a-change. Does not refine or stress-test an existing plan — use iterative-plan-review. Does not document already-built features — use project-documentation. Does not design the contract for an interface — use design-an-api. Does not research open-ended options before there is a feature to specify — use research. Does not map the bounded contexts of existing code — use ddd-analysis.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Splits a body of context into a sequence of vertical-slice build phases where each phase is independently demonstrable to a real user and each builds on the previous. Use when the user wants to plan, sequence, phase, slice, break down, or order the build of a feature, capability, system, or initiative, and produces a plain-language phased build outline. Does not produce implementation detail — use plan-implementation. Does not specify behavior that has not been decided — use plan-a-feature. Does not perform gap analysis between two artifacts — use gap-analysis. Does not break a plan into independently-grabbable work items — use plan-work-items.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Produce a plain-language manual test plan from the context supplied to it — an executive summary, a high-level list of named tests, and a detail section per test with the steps a person follows by hand and the outcomes they should expect. Use when you want to create, draft, generate, or outline a manual test plan, manual QA steps, hands-on verification steps, or an acceptance walkthrough for a feature, change, branch, plan, or PR. When the plan holds more than five tests and at least two natural categories emerge, both the test list and the detail sections are organized under plain-language categories. When nothing in the supplied context can be manually tested, it says so and asks for more context instead of producing a document. Does not analyze code for automated test coverage gaps — use automated-test-planning. Does not write test code — use tdd. Does not review code quality — use code-review. Does not stress-test an existing plan — use iterative-plan-review.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.