599 skills · sorted by relevance
Terapia de Aceptación y Compromiso (ACT) según Steven Hayes: modelo Hexaflex con los seis procesos nucleares de la flexibilidad psicológica.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
スティーブン・ヘイズによるアクセプタンス＆コミットメント・セラピー（ACT）：心理的柔軟性の6つのコアプロセスを備えたヘキサフレックス・モデル。
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Терапия принятия и ответственности (ACT) Стивенса Хейса: модель Гексафлекс с шестью ключевыми процессами психологической гибкости.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Role-based multi-model strategy. The model catalog lives in a local configuration file instead of the skill text -- roles (thinker/decision-maker, long-running worker, draft generator, reviewer/acceptance, escalation), reasoning effort as an independent axis, mandatory review for draft models, provider switching for independent reviews, budgets, delegation flow, and cost/quality of small workers.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Acceptance & Commitment Therapy (ACT) nach Steven Hayes: Hexaflex-Modell mit den sechs Kernprozessen psychischer Flexibilität.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Research any open-source repository end to end and answer the core question — SHOULD YOU contribute to it? — with a GO / NO-GO / GO-IF verdict backed by evidence: snapshot, momentum, contribution landscape (PR acceptance rates, outside-contributor merge rates, first-timer outcomes), issue health, governance, community sentiment, and a final go/no-go recommendation. Use when the user asks 'should I contribute to X', wants a before-I-contribute due-diligence check on a project, asks whether a project accepts outside PRs, wants contribution-health numbers like PR merge rates or stale-PR counts, or asks for a deep dive on an open-source codebase's health and dynamics before investing time in it.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Derive slices from specs, order by dependencies, write acceptance criteria with citations, and finalize phase/progress artifacts
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Write a 5-part mini spec (goal, constraints, acceptance criteria, verification, done gate) before starting any multi-step, externally-delivered, or risky task. Triggers when: a request has 3+ steps, touches external delivery, or is easy to declare done too early. NOT for: single lookups, one-line edits, routine acks, or simple factual answers.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Plan, execute, and document validation, verification, and transfer of analytical procedures under the governing framework - ICH Q2(R2) and Q14, USP <1220>/<1225>/<1226>, ICH M10 bioanalytical, CLSI EP, or ISO/IEC 17025. Use for HPLC, LC-MS/MS, GC, CE, ICP-MS, dissolution, qNMR, qPCR, NIR, and ligand binding or cell-based assays whenever the question is whether a procedure is fit for its intended purpose. Triggers include "method validation", "analytical method validation", "AMV", "validation protocol", "acceptance criteria", "linearity", "reportable range", "accuracy and precision", "repeatability", "intermediate precision", "recovery", "LOD", "LOQ", "detection limit", "quantitation limit", "specificity", "robustness", "method transfer", "method comparison", "Deming", "Passing-Bablok", "Bland-Altman", "equivalence testing", "OOS investigation", "ICH Q2", "Q2(R2)", "Q14", "USP 1225", "ICH M10", "incurred sample reanalysis", "ISR", "CLSI EP", and any request to show that an assay works.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Evaluate and improve AI-generated output with explicit rubrics, reflection loops, and stop conditions. Use when building self-critique workflows, evaluator-optimizer pipelines, or acceptance gates for code, docs, analysis, or plans.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Interactive 9-step prompt crafting and delegation protocol for autonomous multi-agent teams. Enforces objective verification, integrity modes, and acceptance criteria across Antigravity, Claude Code, Cursor, OpenCode, Codex, and Roo Code.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
SQLite-based ticket tracking for structured development workflows. Use this skill when the user asks to initialize a ticket database, import requirements, list tickets, get the next ticket to work on, mark tickets as done, or check ticket status. Essential for managing epics, user stories, and acceptance criteria.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Guides the creation of agile user stories and Gherkin feature files. Use when the user wants to create a user story, write acceptance criteria, define Gherkin scenarios, or author BDD feature files. This should trigger for requests such as Create a user story; Write a user story; I need to write a user story. Part of cursor-rules-java project
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Build, maintain, and run conformance tests for canonical App-in-Skill projects created by kelly-app-skill-creator. Use when a Kelly app skill needs contract checks, local server smoke tests, responsive browser acceptance, temporary open-source Busabase integration, environment-gated Busabase Cloud OAuth verification, lazy provisioning checks, persistence tests, AirApp parity tests, or CI coverage. Keep app creation in kelly-app-skill-creator and own only the reusable test harness, per-skill fixtures, execution gates, diagnostics, and truthful pass/fail/skip reporting.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Push a task to a deeper version of itself, not a bigger one: name what a top practitioner would add, the raw material to start from, the methods and tools to use, and an independent check of the result, then rewrite the brief and do the work to it. Use when the user explicitly invokes my-better, says a result is shallow or not good enough (「浅い」「もっと深く」 「物足りない」), or before starting a hard task: open-ended research, analysis, design, or writing whose quality depends on expertise, primary evidence, or verification the request does not mention. Do NOT use for routine edits, single obvious fixes, quick lookups, fully specified tasks with clear acceptance checks, or work covered by a more specific skill such as my-diagnose, my-epic, or my-pr.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Turns product or tech specs into concrete Notion tasks that Claude code can implement. Breaks down spec pages into detailed implementation plans with clear tasks, acceptance criteria, and progress tracking to guide development from requirements to completion.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Review code changes adversarially using parallel review layers (Blind Hunter, Edge Case Hunter, Acceptance Auditor) with structured triage into actionable categories. Use when the user says "run code review" or "review this code"
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Autonomous Reforge-guided refactor workflow for the Humans repository. Use when the user wants Codex to target a section such as Shifts, Users, Teams, Tickets, Camps, or Store, create a dedicated worktree/branch from origin/main, run iterative architecture-focused improvements, score each stage with Reforge, gate commits through a score-blind read-only architecture review, append score and verdict details to commit messages after review acceptance, push progress, and open a PR when the loop reaches stasis.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Review code changes against linked GitHub issue specs to catch implementation drift — building something plausible but wrong. Checks each acceptance criterion against actual code.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Turn product requirements into scoped tasks with dependencies and acceptance criteria. Use for implementation planning and prioritization.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Prepare a request to change the terms of a Japanese job offer before accepting it, sorting what the user wants changed (pay components, start date, work style, location, title, probation) by priority, tying each ask to a basis the user can show (the written offer, the job posting, what was said in interviews, their own records), working the timing back from the acceptance deadline, and drafting the message to the employer or recruiting agent. Use when a user has an offer and wants to ask for higher pay, a later start date, more remote days, or other changed terms, or wants to know how to raise it without losing the offer; do not use to predict whether the request will succeed, to set a target figure from market rates, to fabricate a competing offer, to decide whether to accept, or to send anything to the employer.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Check the working conditions of a Japanese job offer item by item against the conditions an employer states in writing, compare the offer letter or 労働条件通知書 with the job posting and what was said in interviews, and separate what is confirmed in writing from what is still only verbal. Use when a user has received an offer, a working-conditions notice, or an employment contract and wants to know what is missing, what conflicts with earlier statements, and what to confirm before the acceptance deadline; do not use to rule on whether the terms are lawful, to decide whether to accept or decline, or to contact the employer on the user's behalf.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
ATAC-seq library quality control -- TSS enrichment, FRiP, fragment-size periodicity, library complexity (NRF/PBC1/PBC2), mitochondrial fraction, and ENCODE 4 thresholds. Use when assessing whether an ATAC-seq library passes ENCODE acceptance criteria, diagnosing transposition artefacts, comparing Omni-ATAC vs standard prep quality, or selecting which replicates to drop before peak calling.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Discover, build, verify, and optionally export (HTML, optional PDF) the evidence manifest of one SDD Composy task in evidence_required, routing it toward review_required. Use when acceptance evidence must be assembled or checked — 'juntar as evidências da task', 'gerar o relatório de evidências', 'verify the evidence manifest'. Do NOT use to run tests (sdd-qa), review code (sdd-review), or inspect the trace (sdd-trace).
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.