15 skills · sorted by relevance
Add one optional Codex critique to a decision draft produced by council. With explicit consent to send the draft to OpenAI, examine weak conclusions, missing failure scenarios, and overlooked dissent before the user makes the final decision.
Evaluate a strategic choice through multiple executive roles, each forming an independent view before discussion. Produce a board memo with recommendations, votes, dissent, risks, and success or stop conditions for the founder's decision.
Record founder-approved decisions with chosen options, success measures, stop conditions, and dissent. Keep approved decisions separate from discussion transcripts so future advisory sessions use confirmed choices, with a review scheduled after 90 days.
Review an executed business decision against its original success and stopping criteria. Compare actual results, revisit assumptions and dissenting views, and create a retrospective record with lessons and follow-up actions.
Use a panel of three to five agents to decide between options or assess a plan. Independent initial opinions and anonymous deliberation lead to one verdict with confidence, preserved dissent, a validation test, and a next action.
Compare ambiguous choices through four advisory perspectives covering long-term consequences, assumptions, practical execution, and failure risks. The skill presents each position, highlights the strongest disagreement, and combines the findings into a recommendation for the decision.
Develop and prioritize early research ideas through independent brainstorming, structured discussion, evidence checks, and critical review. Keep assumptions, uncertainty, dissent, and scoring reasons visible, then record the human decision and appropriate next steps.
Starter: interpret a council run's verdict artifacts — quorum, dissent, cross-lab validity, and what to do next
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Verification-first methodology for the post-WWII tribunals: the IMT at Nuremberg, the twelve Nuremberg Military Tribunals, and the IMTFE at Tokyo. Citations are verified against the official records (Blue/Green Series, Pritchard-Zaide) and the digital archives (Avalon, Harvard NTP, UVA IMTFE). Guards the four classic traps (IMT vs NMT; Nuremberg vs Tokyo; Charter article numbers; majority judgment vs separate opinions, e.g. the Pal dissent). Research aid, not legal advice. Part of the open-source "Skills for International Justice" library — methodology: github.com/jeannesulzer/international-criminal-tribunals-skills
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Arbitrator research tool for investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS). The tool can summarize arbitrators' experience, with deliverables grounded in primary documents; it can also help find arbitrators based on the issues faced in a particular case. Use when the user asks about an arbitrator ("tell me about arbitrator X", "X, Y and Z"), wants help choosing or shortlisting arbitrators for a case, or asks about appointments, dissents, issue track records (e.g. FET, expropriation), challenge risk, double-hatting, or tribunal composition. Profiles are grounded in the UNCTAD ISDS Navigator dataset plus targeted live lookups (ICSID); deep verification retrieves the actual decisions. Sibling of isds-research.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Convene a roundtable of sub-agents that debate a decision or proposal from opposing perspectives — parallel independent statements, anonymous cross-review, then a chaired verdict reporting consensus and dissent.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Engineering ethics covering safety, professional codes of conduct, public welfare responsibility, whistleblowing, case studies (Challenger, Columbia, Hyatt Regency, Bhopal, Therac-25), and the ethical dimensions of design decisions. Includes the NSPE Code of Ethics, the iron ring tradition, risk communication, informed consent in engineering, and the duty to dissent. Use when analyzing ethical dimensions of engineering decisions, teaching professional responsibility, or reviewing designs for safety and public welfare.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
当用户需要做重大决策、团队存在群体思维、或想将决策权下放到一线时触发此技能。帮助建立知情指挥决策模型，让最有信息的人做最终决定。
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Turns one decision discussion (meeting transcript, chat thread, email chain or notes) into a DRAFT one-page decision memo: the decision as stated, status, options considered, evidence cited, dissent recorded verbatim, owner, effective date and review date, with UNKNOWN for anything the discussion did not settle. Use when the user asks to "write up the decision", "record what we decided", "capture the decision from this thread", "draft the decision memo" or "add this to the decision log". Do not use for full minutes or action items, use transcript-to-actions instead; for a technical design decision, use architecture-decision-record; for a paper seeking a decision not yet taken, use board-paper-skeleton. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Debate multi-agente: 2-4 perspectivas (PM, Arquiteto, QA, Security) debatem decisao tecnica. Output: decisao + rationale + dissenting opinions → ADR. Inspirado no Party Mode do BMAD-METHOD.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.