Results for “advisor”

Analyze and simulate options trading strategies using Black-Scholes pricing, Greeks calculation, and risk management guidance.

Diagnose whether an AI workflow suffers from context stuffing or benefits from context engineering, and apply structured techniques to improve reliability.

Analyzes draft prompts, identifies intent and gaps, matches ECC components, and outputs an optimized prompt for the user to paste and run. Advisory only, never executes the task.

Analyze draft prompts to identify intent, scope, and missing context, then generate an optimized prompt with ECC component recommendations. Advisory only — never executes the task.

Agent A5 - Paradigm & Worldview Advisor - Philosophical foundations for research design. Covers ontology, epistemology, axiology, and methodology alignment. Use when: establishing philosophical foundations, justifying methodological choices, writing positionality statements Triggers: paradigm, 패러다임, ontology, epistemology, worldview, 세계관, philosophical foundations, 철학적 기초

Disruptive innovation oracle for business model innovation and strategic disruption. Use when the user asks to talk to Victor or requests the Disruptive Innovation Oracle.

Convene a four-voice council for ambiguous decisions, tradeoffs, and go/no-go calls. Use when multiple valid paths exist and you need structured disagreement before choosing.

Convene a four-voice council for ambiguous decisions, tradeoffs, and go/no-go calls. Use when multiple valid paths exist and you need structured disagreement before choosing.

Agent profile for review API platform contracts, versioning, auth, rate limits, SDK clients, and developer experience. Use when Codex needs a specialist agent perspective for planning, implementation, review, debugging, validation, or handoff in this domain.

Agent profile for review Android Compose code, lifecycle, permissions, navigation, Material behavior, performance, and Play release risks. Use when Codex needs a specialist agent perspective for planning, implementation, review, debugging, validation, or handoff in this domain.

Central status dashboard for the PA agent. Use when: owner asks 'what's the status', 'what are you working on', 'what's happening', or any status/overview question. Aggregates active tasks, open issues, monitored groups, pending follow-ups, and system health into one structured report.

Agent profile for lead framework, dependency, database, SDK, and architecture migrations with sequencing and rollback. Use when Codex needs a specialist agent perspective for planning, implementation, review, debugging, validation, or handoff in this domain.

Use for creating, reviewing, debugging, or testing GitHub Copilot agent hooks in Visual Studio Code, including .github/hooks JSON, lifecycle events, Python handlers, permissions, and structured stdin/stdout. Do not use for advisory instructions, one-off commands, CI workflows, or shell profile hooks.

Read, write, and browse the AgentHub message board for agent coordination.

Agent skill for reviewer - invoke with $agent-reviewer

Generates and edits images using GPT Image 2 across three modes: direct generation via OpenAI-compatible API, prompt engineering for host-native image tools, or pure prompt advisory. Includes 80+ structured templates for posters, UI mockups, product visuals, maps, slides, and more.

Analyze raw prompts, identify intent and gaps, match ECC components (skills/commands/agents/hooks), and output a ready-to-paste optimized prompt. Advisory role only — never executes the task itself. TRIGGER when: user says "optimize prompt", "improve my prompt", "how to write a prompt for", "help me prompt", "rewrite this prompt", or explicitly asks to enhance prompt quality. Also triggers on Chinese equivalents: "优化prompt", "改进prompt", "怎么写prompt", "帮我优化这个指令". DO NOT TRIGGER when: user wants the task executed directly, or says "just do it" / "直接做". DO NOT TRIGGER when user says "优化代码", "优化性能", "optimize performance", "optimize this code" — those are refactoring/performance tasks, not prompt optimization.

Expert CMMC 2.0 (Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification) advisor for US defense contractors and subcontractors in the Defense Industrial Base (DIB). Use this skill whenever a user asks about CMMC 2.0, CMMC Level 1, Level 2, or Level 3, DoD cybersecurity compliance, NIST SP 800-171, CUI (Controlled Unclassified Information) protection, System Security Plan (SSP), Plan of Action & Milestones (POA&M), C3PAO assessments, DIBCAC audits, self-assessment, SPRS score, or any requirement under DFARS 252.204-7012 or 7021. Also trigger for: "CMMC gap analysis", "CMMC readiness", "FCI protection", "CUI scoping", "CMMC practices", "DoD contract cybersecurity", "defense supply chain security", or "prime contractor flow-down requirements".

Plan which model tier handles which work BEFORE execution begins — a high-cognition model deeply understands the problem, lays the foundations, then emits a modular plan assigning each module the cheapest tier that can safely execute it, with escalation tripwires and one-way-door protection. Advisory only: it announces "next module → tier X / model Y" at each boundary and the HUMAN switches models — harnesses like Cursor cannot switch mid-run. Load when the user asks which model to use, wants a model plan, model tiers, model-tier routing, assign models to tasks or modules, says "cheap model got stuck", "which model for this task", "cost-efficient model choice", or when implementation-plan / problem-to-plan need a model: tier column. NOT dynamic-routing (plan-path selection after failure) — this skill assigns cognition tiers to work.

Enriches vague, low-detail prompts into structured, agent-optimized XML before execution. INVOKE IMMEDIATELY — before any tool use or file reads — when you detect any of these signals: prompt under 10 words with no file path or error message; vague action verbs with no object ("fix the bug", "make it better", "clean this up", "refactor this", "optimize performance", "improve the UI", "add authentication", "add payments", "add notifications", "build the feature"); CLARIFIER_ADVISORY in your context window; user says "clarify", "help me describe this", "enrich this prompt", "structure my request". Also triggers on: "make this work", "it's broken", "it looks bad", "add X" with no further detail, "implement Y" with no constraints. Do NOT trigger on: prompts ending with ?, prompts containing error messages or stack traces, prompts with specific file paths, prompts already containing acceptance criteria or success metrics.

Sets up and audits the Claude Code harness for a project: CLAUDE.md, .claude/rules, skills, subagents, settings.json permissions, hooks, verification loop. Commands: kickoff (scaffold new setup), check-playbook (score an existing one), scouting-report (last scorecard), adjust (fix bloat/misplaced instructions), drill (turn advisory prose into real hooks/permissions/CI), decline (record an accepted risk), gameplan (work order with acceptance criteria before building), watch-film (check a diff against that order for scope creep/weakened tests/false claims). Use for setting up Claude Code, or on: "Claude ignores my CLAUDE.md", "it's huge and still misses things", "it said done but ran nothing", "it changed files I didn't ask about", "it weakened a test to pass", "rule, skill, or hook?", "is my setup any good". Not for code quality (code-audit), test coverage (test-assessment), one-off prompt wording (genie-proof-prompts), new skill authoring (skill-creator), or compacting a conversation (handoff).

Expert strategy advisor for products built on LLMs or agents — not general product strategy (see `product-strategy` for that). Use this — proactively and without waiting to be asked — whenever choosing where to apply AI in a product, deciding between RAG and fine-tuning, designing how much autonomy an AI feature should have, evaluating whether an AI feature is actually defensible, or deciding whether to add AI to a feature at all. Also triggers for: "should this be an agent or a simple LLM call", "how much autonomy should this feature have", "RAG vs fine-tuning", "is this AI feature defensible", "our AI feature keeps hallucinating and users don't trust it", "should we build this with AI or just ship it deterministic", "AI product wedge", "what happens to this feature when the models get better", "human-in-the-loop design for AI features". Produces a decision-focused brief: the wedge, the architecture choice, the autonomy level, and the defensibility bet — each with an explicit trade-off.