Proactive bug-hunting workflow. Assesses codebase risk through complexity, coverage, and structural analysis, then spawns focused investigators that write reproducing tests to validate suspected bugs. Thoroughness over speed.
EnglishMulti-ticket batch workflow. Takes a batch of tickets, plans execution order, implements each via /implement in autonomous mode, runs cross-cutting quality passes, and presents results for final review.
EnglishFull-lifecycle project workflow. Takes batched tickets, implements via /implement-batch, runs smoke tests, then executes a comprehensive quality pipeline (refactor, review-arch, review-test, review-doc, review-release). Maximizes autonomy with andon cord escape.
EnglishAutonomous bug-elimination loop. Iteratively invokes /bug-hunt and /implement-batch until findings converge below an operator-specified severity floor. At termination, runs /review-test scoped to the run's new reproducing tests and fixes quality issues above the floor. Auto-approves /bug-hunt and /review-test ticket proposals; pulls the andon cord on contested findings, repeated implementation failure, hard-cap exhaustion, or breaking-change proposals. Optional /refactor finisher.
EnglishAutonomous technical lead. Takes commander's intent and drives a project to completion through an OODA loop over implementation, refactoring, review, and bug-hunting skills. Has broad authority — creates tickets, commits, invokes any skill — and only escalates via andon cord for irreversible actions, public releases, or genuinely blocking decisions. User acts as product owner; skill acts as tech lead.
EnglishAutonomous comprehensive refactoring. Three-phase pipeline — Phase 1 /refactor (tactical, loops internally to convergence) → Phase 2 loop of /review-arch + /implement-batch until architectural findings converge below a severity floor (default HIGH+) → Phase 3 /refactor (catches tactical issues introduced by restructuring). Auto-approves /review-arch ticket proposals; pulls the andon cord on contested findings, breaking-change proposals, repeated implementation failure, or Phase-2 hard-cap exhaustion (5 architectural iterations).
EnglishAutonomous comprehensive review. Once-through pipeline over /review-health, /review-arch, /review-security, /review-perf, /review-a11y, /review-test, /review-release. Operator-configurable ticket creation at startup — when ON, auto-approves sub-skill ticket proposals per the orchestrator-family contract; when OFF, uniformly declines and surfaces findings in the consolidated report. Auto-detects sub-skills that do not apply (no web content → skip /review-a11y; no tests → skip /review-test).
EnglishPre-compaction housekeeping. Walks a checklist (persistent memory updates, git hygiene, trash cleanup) plus an open-judgment audit, produces an SBAR with a go/no-go recommendation, and emits a copy-pasteable resume prompt for the post-compaction agent if work remains. Run this immediately before /compact.
EnglishAccessibility audit. Dispatches an accessibility auditor to identify WCAG conformance gaps, prioritize by user impact, and recommend fixes. Advisory only — no changes made.
EnglishInteractive architectural review workflow. Analyzes codebase organization via noun analysis, produces a target blueprint, then collaborates with the user to decide what to implement. Changes are made through SMEs, verified with QA, and committed atomically.
EnglishFirst-pass strategic-orientation review of a repository. Produces an evidence-cited map (not a grade) calibrated to a reference class, helping the user decide where to engage, where to tread carefully, and where to leave alone. Advisory only — no changes made.
EnglishPre-release readiness review. Scans for debug artifacts, version mismatches, changelog gaps, git hygiene issues, breaking changes, and license compliance. Runs tests and build verification. Presents consolidated findings for human review before release.
EnglishComprehensive test suite review across five phases. Fills unit coverage gaps, surveys integration coverage, surveys E2E (browser) coverage for webapps, identifies missing fuzz tests, and audits test quality — in that order.
EnglishExploratory workflow for understanding problem spaces and drafting feature proposals, refactorings, or complex bug-fixes. Creates detailed tickets in your issue tracker without doing implementation work.
EnglishAdversarial project planning workflow. Explores the problem space, drafts tickets in batches, then runs two sequential adversarial loops — a UX reviewer ("should we build this?") followed by an implementer ("could we build this?") — to find gaps before implementation. Creates well-specified, batch-tagged tickets upstream only after both loops sign off.
EnglishAnalysis of Competing Hypotheses. Operationalizes Richards Heuer's CIA-tradition technique for systematically narrowing among multiple hypotheses against evidence. Builds an explicit hypothesis-vs-evidence matrix and focuses on disconfirmation rather than confirmation — the central insight: hypotheses cannot be proven, only disconfirmed; the surviving hypothesis is the one with the least disconfirming evidence. Spawns parallel hypothesizers (in isolation, across hypothesis-generation angles) and parallel evidence-gatherers (across evidence classes), then synthesizes into a matrix, diagnosticity analysis, sensitivity analysis, and falsification milestones. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
EnglishGood-faith divergent brainstorming for achieving a goal. Validates assumptions, then spawns brainstormers running different techniques (first-principles, working-backwards, lateral, analogical, constraints-shift, etc.) in isolation, and synthesizes the pool into a report of standouts, reasonable ideas, and hybrid combinations. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
EnglishAdversarial deliberation process for making decisions. Spawns advocate agents for each option who argue their cases before a judge (you) who renders a verdict.
EnglishAbductive reasoning about causes. Takes a phenomenon, separates observations from interpretations, then spawns diagnosticians applying different reasoning lenses (technical, human-factors, process, incentive-structure, environmental, temporal, measurement-artifact, statistical) in isolation. Orchestrator evaluates candidate causes for fit-against-evidence, calibrates confidence honestly, and reports leading candidate(s) with distinguishing evidence needed. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
EnglishProspective failure imagination for a plan, decision, or running system. Operates in two modes — plan mode (a plan has not yet been committed to; imagine its catastrophic failure broadly) and scenario mode (a specific catastrophic scenario is posed against an existing system; investigate causes against the actual code and architecture). Spawns parallel pre-mortemers in isolation across three categories of lens: standard failure classes (technical, operational, estimation, scope, adoption, dependency, team, incentive, detection, reversibility, adversarial), 0-3 ad-hoc target-specific lenses the orchestrator names when warranted, and a first-principles lens that always runs to catch what the prescribed taxonomy misses. Synthesizes into a prioritized risk register with early-warning signals. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
EnglishRetrospective learning from a completed experience. Takes a project, incident, decision that played out, or time period; gathers ground truth (observations) separately from recollections; spawns reflectors applying different lenses (what-worked-vs-got-lucky, what-didn't, what-surprised, system-rewards-vs-intent, decisions-that-aged, what-to-tell-past-self, patterns-that-recur) in isolation; synthesizes into updated mental models as first-class output. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
EnglishProblem redefinition before problem solving. Takes a stated problem, extracts its premises, then spawns reframers applying different lenses (problem-vs-symptom, scope-shift, stakeholder-shift, level-of-abstraction, time-horizon, inversion, category-shift, constraints-shift) in isolation, and synthesizes the alternatives into a report with an orchestrator recommendation. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
EnglishGood-faith adversarial scrutiny of an idea or plan. Spawns critical skeptics across relevant lenses, pairs them with an advocate defending the idea, and synthesizes the exchange into a report. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
EnglishMechanical documentation hygiene. Spawns a doc-maintainer agent to audit all project documentation and fix correctness, completeness, freshness, and consistency issues autonomously within its authority. Surfaces anything requiring user judgment for approval.
EnglishIncludes Implement Batch, Implement Project, Lead Bug Hunt, and other workflows.
Supported by the Atlas install prompt. Skill-specific requirements vary.
Pack stats
What’s included
Bug Hunt
Proactive bug-hunting workflow. Assesses codebase risk through complexity, coverage, and structural analysis, then spawns focused investigators that write reproducing tests to validate suspected bugs. Thoroughness over speed.
Implement Batch
Multi-ticket batch workflow. Takes a batch of tickets, plans execution order, implements each via /implement in autonomous mode, runs cross-cutting quality passes, and presents results for final review.
Implement Project
Full-lifecycle project workflow. Takes batched tickets, implements via /implement-batch, runs smoke tests, then executes a comprehensive quality pipeline (refactor, review-arch, review-test, review-doc, review-release). Maximizes autonomy with andon cord escape.
Lead Bug Hunt
Autonomous bug-elimination loop. Iteratively invokes /bug-hunt and /implement-batch until findings converge below an operator-specified severity floor. At termination, runs /review-test scoped to the run's new reproducing tests and fixes quality issues above the floor. Auto-approves /bug-hunt and /review-test ticket proposals; pulls the andon cord on contested findings, repeated implementation failure, hard-cap exhaustion, or breaking-change proposals. Optional /refactor finisher.
Lead Project
Autonomous technical lead. Takes commander's intent and drives a project to completion through an OODA loop over implementation, refactoring, review, and bug-hunting skills. Has broad authority — creates tickets, commits, invokes any skill — and only escalates via andon cord for irreversible actions, public releases, or genuinely blocking decisions. User acts as product owner; skill acts as tech lead.
Lead Refactor
Autonomous comprehensive refactoring. Three-phase pipeline — Phase 1 /refactor (tactical, loops internally to convergence) → Phase 2 loop of /review-arch + /implement-batch until architectural findings converge below a severity floor (default HIGH+) → Phase 3 /refactor (catches tactical issues introduced by restructuring). Auto-approves /review-arch ticket proposals; pulls the andon cord on contested findings, breaking-change proposals, repeated implementation failure, or Phase-2 hard-cap exhaustion (5 architectural iterations).
Lead Review
Autonomous comprehensive review. Once-through pipeline over /review-health, /review-arch, /review-security, /review-perf, /review-a11y, /review-test, /review-release. Operator-configurable ticket creation at startup — when ON, auto-approves sub-skill ticket proposals per the orchestrator-family contract; when OFF, uniformly declines and surfaces findings in the consolidated report. Auto-detects sub-skills that do not apply (no web content → skip /review-a11y; no tests → skip /review-test).
Pre Compact
Pre-compaction housekeeping. Walks a checklist (persistent memory updates, git hygiene, trash cleanup) plus an open-judgment audit, produces an SBAR with a go/no-go recommendation, and emits a copy-pasteable resume prompt for the post-compaction agent if work remains. Run this immediately before /compact.
Review Accessibility
Accessibility audit. Dispatches an accessibility auditor to identify WCAG conformance gaps, prioritize by user impact, and recommend fixes. Advisory only — no changes made.
Review Arch
Interactive architectural review workflow. Analyzes codebase organization via noun analysis, produces a target blueprint, then collaborates with the user to decide what to implement. Changes are made through SMEs, verified with QA, and committed atomically.
Review Health
First-pass strategic-orientation review of a repository. Produces an evidence-cited map (not a grade) calibrated to a reference class, helping the user decide where to engage, where to tread carefully, and where to leave alone. Advisory only — no changes made.
Review Release
Pre-release readiness review. Scans for debug artifacts, version mismatches, changelog gaps, git hygiene issues, breaking changes, and license compliance. Runs tests and build verification. Presents consolidated findings for human review before release.
Review Test
Comprehensive test suite review across five phases. Fills unit coverage gaps, surveys integration coverage, surveys E2E (browser) coverage for webapps, identifies missing fuzz tests, and audits test quality — in that order.
Scope
Exploratory workflow for understanding problem spaces and drafting feature proposals, refactorings, or complex bug-fixes. Creates detailed tickets in your issue tracker without doing implementation work.
Scope Project
Adversarial project planning workflow. Explores the problem space, drafts tickets in batches, then runs two sequential adversarial loops — a UX reviewer ("should we build this?") followed by an implementer ("could we build this?") — to find gaps before implementation. Creates well-specified, batch-tagged tickets upstream only after both loops sign off.
Think Ach
Analysis of Competing Hypotheses. Operationalizes Richards Heuer's CIA-tradition technique for systematically narrowing among multiple hypotheses against evidence. Builds an explicit hypothesis-vs-evidence matrix and focuses on disconfirmation rather than confirmation — the central insight: hypotheses cannot be proven, only disconfirmed; the surviving hypothesis is the one with the least disconfirming evidence. Spawns parallel hypothesizers (in isolation, across hypothesis-generation angles) and parallel evidence-gatherers (across evidence classes), then synthesizes into a matrix, diagnosticity analysis, sensitivity analysis, and falsification milestones. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
Think Brainstorm
Good-faith divergent brainstorming for achieving a goal. Validates assumptions, then spawns brainstormers running different techniques (first-principles, working-backwards, lateral, analogical, constraints-shift, etc.) in isolation, and synthesizes the pool into a report of standouts, reasonable ideas, and hybrid combinations. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
Think Deliberate
Adversarial deliberation process for making decisions. Spawns advocate agents for each option who argue their cases before a judge (you) who renders a verdict.
Think Diagnose
Abductive reasoning about causes. Takes a phenomenon, separates observations from interpretations, then spawns diagnosticians applying different reasoning lenses (technical, human-factors, process, incentive-structure, environmental, temporal, measurement-artifact, statistical) in isolation. Orchestrator evaluates candidate causes for fit-against-evidence, calibrates confidence honestly, and reports leading candidate(s) with distinguishing evidence needed. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
Think Premortem
Prospective failure imagination for a plan, decision, or running system. Operates in two modes — plan mode (a plan has not yet been committed to; imagine its catastrophic failure broadly) and scenario mode (a specific catastrophic scenario is posed against an existing system; investigate causes against the actual code and architecture). Spawns parallel pre-mortemers in isolation across three categories of lens: standard failure classes (technical, operational, estimation, scope, adoption, dependency, team, incentive, detection, reversibility, adversarial), 0-3 ad-hoc target-specific lenses the orchestrator names when warranted, and a first-principles lens that always runs to catch what the prescribed taxonomy misses. Synthesizes into a prioritized risk register with early-warning signals. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
Think Reflect
Retrospective learning from a completed experience. Takes a project, incident, decision that played out, or time period; gathers ground truth (observations) separately from recollections; spawns reflectors applying different lenses (what-worked-vs-got-lucky, what-didn't, what-surprised, system-rewards-vs-intent, decisions-that-aged, what-to-tell-past-self, patterns-that-recur) in isolation; synthesizes into updated mental models as first-class output. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
Think Reframe
Problem redefinition before problem solving. Takes a stated problem, extracts its premises, then spawns reframers applying different lenses (problem-vs-symptom, scope-shift, stakeholder-shift, level-of-abstraction, time-horizon, inversion, category-shift, constraints-shift) in isolation, and synthesizes the alternatives into a report with an orchestrator recommendation. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
Think Scrutinize
Good-faith adversarial scrutiny of an idea or plan. Spawns critical skeptics across relevant lenses, pairs them with an advocate defending the idea, and synthesizes the exchange into a report. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
Tidy Docs
Mechanical documentation hygiene. Spawns a doc-maintainer agent to audit all project documentation and fix correctness, completeness, freshness, and consistency issues autonomously within its authority. Surfaces anything requiring user judgment for approval.
Showing 24 of 25 skills. Use the list’s page controls above to explore the rest.
Quick start
- Choose your skills. Select individual skills above, or choose the entire pack.
- Copy the install prompt. Use Copy install prompt above the list.
- Send it to your agent. Paste into your coding agent’s chat. Your agent reviews the source and guides the setup.
Try it with your agent
After installation, start with a request like:
Use the Bug Hunt skill to help with my task.
Ask me for the context you need before getting started.Requirements & license
- A coding agent that can access your project files and install skills.
- Your agent checks each skill’s instructions, dependencies, and permissions during setup.
- Reported license for the skills shown: MIT. The author’s terms apply.