184 skills · sorted by relevance
Build an HTML presentation for a feature investment decision, organizing user problems, options, tradeoffs, and success measures. Use the graphify-dark-graph template's dark visual style, with speaker notes and presentation controls for reviews across product, engineering, design, and leadership.
[omh] Engineering leadership over roadmap and risk: roadmap, PM, technical tradeoffs, risk, delivery, release, and follow-up operating cadence. Use when the user says: cto-loop, cto loop, cto, cto pm, pm dev qa security ops, roadmap technical tradeoffs, technical tradeoff, delivery risk.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Research products against a budget and required features, then compare prices, specifications, and review findings in a table. Get one recommendation with its tradeoff, plus a price history check for deals when available.
Clarify decision reasoning and combine multiple perspectives into explanations suited to the audience. Helps refine PR descriptions, design notes, and nontechnical summaries while making assumptions, tradeoffs, and uncertainty explicit.
Choose suitable Zoom APIs and SDKs, tools for connecting or embedding Zoom features, for a product idea. Get a recommended approach, supporting components, tradeoffs, and a concrete implementation sequence.
Develop independent solutions to a defined problem, compare them against shared requirements, and combine useful contributions into a coherent recommendation. An independent assessment and evidence checks support the selection, while unresolved tradeoffs and verification needs remain explicit.
Review consequential or ambiguous decisions through ten stages of structured reflection. Separate observations from assumptions, examine alternatives and risks, and produce a recommendation supported by evidence, with verification needs and conditions for revisiting the decision.
Develop security design improvements from vulnerability reports, incident documents, source code, or scan results. Compare architectural options with before-and-after diagrams, engineering tradeoffs, and migration plans to support a concrete design decision.
Develop security design improvements from vulnerability reports, incident documents, source code, or scan results. Compare architectural options with before-and-after diagrams, engineering tradeoffs, and migration plans to support a concrete design decision.
Turn scattered notes and discussions into proposals, requirements documents, or decision records. The workflow gathers essential context, builds an outline, drafts sections with feedback, and checks whether readers without prior knowledge can understand the result.
Run any question, idea, or decision through a council of 5 AI advisors who independently analyze it, peer-review each other anonymously, and synthesize a final verdict. Based on Karpathy's LLM Council methodology. MANDATORY TRIGGERS: 'council this', 'run the council', 'war room this', 'pressure-test this', 'stress-test this', 'debate this'. STRONG TRIGGERS (use when combined with a real decision or tradeoff): 'should I X or Y', 'which option', 'what would you do', 'is this the right move', 'validate this', 'get multiple perspectives', 'I can't decide', 'I'm torn between'. Do NOT trigger on simple yes/no questions, factual lookups, or casual 'should I' without a meaningful tradeoff (e.g. 'should I use markdown' is not a council question). DO trigger when the user presents a genuine decision with stakes, multiple options, and context that suggests they want it pressure-tested from multiple angles.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Makes agent reasoning visible, surfaces tradeoffs, and fades help so humans build judgment. Use when reviewing or learning from agent-written code.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Contract for the project decision journal (tradeoffs and lessons-learned logs). Use when recording a decision, tradeoff, or lesson, or building a consumer hook.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
独立开发者与微型 SaaS — 单人或极小团队 (≤3 人) 构建可持续订阅收入的软件产品商业, 有别于自由职业/咨询、企业级 SaaS 和开源维护: (a) 产品发现与验证 (自己的痒 vs 市场优先 Nugent/Walling; 着陆页冒烟测试; 先接 Stripe 再写代码; JTBD 访谈适配独立开发者场景; Reddit/HN/X/社区痛点挖掘; Mom Test 验证框架; 公开构建作为验证机制); (b) 独立开发者技术架构 (无聊技术论 McKinley; 单体优先; serverless vs VPS 在 ≤$100/月预算下的取舍; Rails/Django/Laravel/Next.js 等框架的出货速度选型; 托管服务优先于自建; Supabase/PlanetScale/Neon 数据库即服务; Clerk/Auth0 认证即服务; Stripe/Paddle/LemonSqueezy 支付; Vercel/Fly.io/Railway 部署; AI 辅助编码 Cursor/Copilot 作为力量倍增器); (c) 无营销团队的分发与增长 (SEO 作为微型 SaaS 护城河; Product Hunt 发布; AppSumo 终身授权利弊; 冷邮件; Twitter/X 公开构建; IndieHackers 社区分发; 集成市场 Shopify/WordPress/Zapier/Slack 应用目录; 联盟计划; 一人内容营销); (d) 定价与变现 (SaaS 定价心理学; freemium vs 免费试用 vs 纯付费; 按席位 vs 按用量 vs 固定费率; 年付折扣; 老用户保价; 微型 SaaS 流失率控制; MRR/ARR/LTV/CAC 在微型规模的含义; $10K MRR 里程碑心理学); (e) 独立创始人心智模型与生活设计 (default alive vs default dead Graham; 拉面盈利 Levels; 生活方式生意 vs 增长生意的光谱; 独立开发者倦怠预防; 时间管理与上下文切换成本; 地理套利与远程优先; 一次构建反复销售的资产思维; 社区作为支持网络 IndieHackers/WIP/MicroConf); (f) 法务与运营基础 (公司注册地选择 LLC/Ltd/GmbH 税效; Stripe Atlas vs Firstbase vs 本地律师; 服务条款与隐私政策; GDPR/CCPA 低成本合规; 知识产权基础; 首次雇人的承包商 vs 员工选择; 独立开发者会计 SaaS — Xero/QuickBooks; 多辖区税务义务)。中国独立开发者生态: 出海作为主导策略 (从中国构建面向全球市场的产品以避开国内竞争/监管); 即刻/V2EX/少数派作为社区枢纽; 微信小程序作为替代分发; 小报童/爱发电作为中文市场变现; 人民币定价心理学; 支付宝/微信支付集成; ICP 备案要求; 中国区 App Store 审核差异; 独立开发者周刊。诚实处理: 生存偏差 (每一个 Pieter Levels 背后是数千个从未达到 $1K MRR 的人), AI 对微型 SaaS 生态位的颠覆 (wrapper 产品脆弱), 独自构建的孤独与心理健康成本, 公开构建的表演性质 vs 真正透明, AppSumo 终身授权上瘾毁坏单位经济, 样板代码销售的伦理边界。不含: 企业级 SaaS (不同 GTM/销售/融资模型), 不含: 自由职业/咨询 (用时间换钱非建资产), 不含: 开源维护 (不同可持续性模型), 不含: 风投支持的创业 (不同增长期望), 不含: 无代码/低代码平台构建 (相邻但不同受众), 不含: 内容创作作为主业。 (Independent Developer and Micro-SaaS — the craft of single-person or tiny-team (≤3 people) software product businesses that generate sustainable recurring revenue without venture capital, distinct from freelancing/consulting, enterprise SaaS, and open-source maintainership: (a) product discovery and validation (scratching your own itch vs market-first Nugent/Walling; landing page smoke tests; Stripe checkout before code; Jobs-to-Be-Done interview adapted to solo context; Reddit/HN/X/community pain-point mining; idea validation frameworks Fitzpatrick Mom Test; build-in-public as validation mechanism); (b) technical architecture for solo operators (boring technology thesis Mckinley; monolith-first; serverless vs VPS tradeoffs for ≤$100/mo infra; framework selection for shipping speed — Rails/Django/Laravel/Next.js/Remix/SvelteKit; managed services over self-hosted whenever possible; database-as-a-service Supabase/PlanetScale/Neon/Turso; auth-as-a-service Clerk/Auth0/Supabase Auth; payment integration Stripe/Paddle/LemonSqueezy; deployment Vercel/Fly.io/Railway/Render; monorepo vs polyrepo for solo; AI-assisted coding Cursor/Copilot as force multiplier); (c) distribution and growth without a marketing team (SEO as moat for micro-SaaS Ahrefs-style content marketing on 1-person budget; Product Hunt launches; AppSumo lifetime deals tradeoffs; cold email outreach; Twitter/X building in public; IndieHackers community distribution; integration marketplaces Shopify/WordPress/Zapier/Slack app directories as channels; affiliate programs; content marketing at scale-of-one); (d) pricing and monetization (SaaS pricing psychology Patel/Campbell; freemium vs free trial vs paid-only; per-seat vs usage-based vs flat-rate; annual discount strategies; grandfathering existing customers; churn reduction for micro-SaaS — Baremetrics/ProfitWell/ChartMogul analytics; MRR/ARR/LTV/CAC at micro scale; the $10K MRR milestone psychology); (e) solo founder mental model and lifestyle design (default alive vs default dead Graham; ramen profitability Levels; lifestyle business vs growth business spectrum; burnout prevention for solo operators — no team to delegate to; time management and context-switching costs; geographic arbitrage and remote-first; the 'build once sell twice' asset mindset; community as support network IndieHackers/WIP/MicroConf); (f) legal and operational basics (incorporation LLC/Ltd/Gm
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Brainstorms and debates approaches, then drives toward an actionable decision. Use whenever someone needs a thinking partner for a decision they're facing: 'discuss', 'debate', 'brainstorm', 'weigh options', 'tradeoffs', 'should I do X or Y', 'help me decide', 'I'm torn between', 'sanity check my thinking', or 'what do you think about'. The user must be asking for help reasoning through a choice — not asking to build, fix, evaluate, plan, or modify something (even if the topic involves this skill itself). Picks the right decision lens, surfaces tradeoffs and blind spots, pushes back when reasoning is genuinely weak, and never implements.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Use for tradeoff analysis, or when the user must pick between concrete options: "A or B?", "which library should we use?", "build vs buy", "compare these approaches". Scores options on weighted criteria, tests sensitivity and reversibility. Skip for open ideation or single-option reviews.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Name what was prioritized, what was sacrificed, and whether the tradeoff was right. Every design decision trades something. Use when evaluating design decisions, defending choices, or helping teams understand what they're giving up.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Guide development and debugging in Next.js 16 and later using Turbopack, a tool that bundles application code. Review slow startup, live updates, caching, webpack alternatives, bundle analysis, and version-specific proxy file naming.
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.
Choose a named creative method suited to the project and stage of work. Generate, expand, compare, or refine ideas with concrete mechanisms, honest tradeoffs, and at least one practical option with a first step.
Work through complex or costly decisions with a structured process covering context, research, competing perspectives, planning, execution, and critical review. The workflow adapts its depth to the task and produces recommendations with tradeoffs, risks, and success criteria.
Find restaurants that fit the group, occasion, location, and budget. Check menus, hours, prices, and booking options, then suggest suitable places for dining out, delivery, or pickup, explaining tradeoffs and details that remain unconfirmed.
Record durable Cherry Studio engineering decisions in Agent Notes. Determine which changes need a note, prepare specifications with verifiable acceptance criteria, and manage approval, implementation, rejection, and replacement while preserving the reasoning behind decisions.
Review system architecture and major design changes for scalability, resilience, and maintainability. Identify risks, compare design tradeoffs, and document recommendations and next steps across services, APIs, data storage, security, and deployment.