Results for “wan”

MUST USE when user wants to 调研/research/搜索/search/查/找/look up anything on the internet — e.g. 全网调研 X / 帮我调研一下 X / 查一下 X / 搜搜 X / 看看大家怎么评价 X / X 上有什么讨论 / research this topic。 Also MUST USE when user mentions any platform or shares any URL/链接: 小红书/xiaohongshu/xhs, Twitter/推特/X, B站/bilibili, Reddit, Facebook, Instagram, V2EX, LinkedIn/领英/招聘/求职/jobs, YouTube, GitHub code search, 小宇宙播客, 雪球/股票行情, RSS feeds, or any web URL. 15 platforms, multi-backend routing (OpenCLI / per-platform CLIs / APIs). Zero config for 6 channels. Run `agent-reach doctor --json` to see which backend serves each platform right now. NOT for: 写报告/数据分析/翻译等内容加工（本 skill 只负责从互联网获取内容）； 发帖/评论/点赞等写操作；已有专门 skill 的平台（先用专门 skill）。 【路由方式】SKILL.md 包含路由表和常用命令，复杂场景需按需阅读对应分类的 references/*.md。 分类：search / social (小红书/推特/B站/V2EX/Reddit/Facebook/Instagram) / career(LinkedIn) / dev(github) / web(网页/文章/RSS) / video(YouTube/B站/播客)。

Simulator.Company actor (record) specialist. Use when the user wants to create, update, read, search, or filter the *instances* of a form template (a.k.a. Account Template records) — i.e. data-bearing actors — and needs the `data` value protocol right. Activate when the user says "create an actor", "add a record", "create a record from this template", "fill in a form", "update actor data", "find actors where field = …", "filter actors by balance", "создай актор", "заполни шаблон", or "добавь запись". ALSO use this skill when the user asks what **processes / functions / Corezoid processes** an actor has or can call, or about an actor's **shared API keys / available functions** — call `getCorezoidProcesses`: "what processes/functions can this actor call", "actor's connected processes", "actor's API keys", "available functions of the actor", "які процеси/функції доступні актору", "процеси актора", "функції актора", "ключі доступу актора", "какие процессы/функции у актора", "процессы актора", "доступные функции а

Simulator.Company skill registry specialist — the data-driven analogue of these built-in skills. Use when the user wants to RUN a saved playbook ("run skill", "use the … skill", "/skill <slug>", "is there a skill for …", "what skills do I have"), or to AUTHOR one ("create a skill", "save this as a skill / playbook", "teach simulator to …", "make a reusable procedure"). A skill is an actor of the `Skills` system form whose `description` holds a step-by-step procedure (which MCP tools to call, with concrete entity ids) for a workspace-specific task such as "create a smart contract" or "onboard a client". Activate on: "run skill", "use playbook", "is there a skill for", "what skills do I have", "save as skill", "create a skill", "teach simulator", "запусти скіл", "використай скіл", "є скіл для", "які скіли є", "збережи як скіл", "створи скіл", "навчи simulator", "запусти навык", "используй навык", "сохрани как навык", "создай навык".

Drive Palmier Pro, an open source AI-native macOS video editor (Swift, SwiftUI/AppKit, AVFoundation) that exposes its timeline as an MCP server at `http://127.0.0.1:19789/mcp` so Claude Code/Desktop, Cursor, or Codex can read and edit a project's tracks, clips, media, transcript, captions, color/effects, and trigger generative AI (video/image/audio) requests side-by-side with a human editor. Use when the user wants to connect an agent to Palmier Pro's MCP server, call its timeline/clip/media/generation tools (`get_timeline`, `add_clips`, `move_clips`, `generate_video`, ...), build/run/test the Swift app from source, or debug the MCP tool surface in `ToolDefinitions.swift`/`ToolExecutor+*.swift`. Triggers on: "palmier pro", "palmier-pro", "AI video editor MCP", "connect Claude to my video editor", "palmier MCP server", "edit my timeline with an agent", "swift build PalmierPro", "palmier-pro mcpb", "manage_project"/"get_timeline"/"add_clips" tool.

Simulator.Company Smart Form (CDU) STYLING specialist — authoring complex Less/CSS for Smart Forms: theme tokens, page/form/section layout, component re-skinning, reusable style patterns, responsive and design-system approaches. Use when the user wants to STYLE or RESTYLE an existing Smart Form / CDU app — change its look, build a theme, style a table / sidebar / modal / form, add a design system, fix spacing/colors/fonts, or apply a complex visual design. This skill owns the `style` / `styles/` layer; it reuses the Smart Form tools (pullSmartForm / pushSmartForm / deploySmartForm) but does NOT create form templates — for the data-schema form template use `simulator-forms`, and for page layout / viewModel / backend logic use `simulator-smart-forms` / `simulator-smart-forms-logic`. Activate on: "style a smart form", "CDU styles", "theme the form", "restyle", "custom CSS/Less for the app", "style the table/sidebar/modal/button", "design system for the smart form", "make it look like …", "застилізувати смартформ

Mine a codebase or product for underexploited assets — capabilities, infrastructure, data, integrations, and workflows built for one narrow purpose that could produce far more value. Finds platform primitives hiding inside features, internal tooling that could serve customers, and data accumulated but never leveraged. Produces an evidence-gated report (max 5 opportunities, mandatory kill list, one forced answer) plus a wwbd_packet JSON. Use whenever the user says "WWBD", "what would Bezos do", "what are we sitting on", "what did we accidentally build", "what could this become", "find opportunities in this repo", "what are we underexploiting", "is there a product hiding in here", or wants to know if existing infrastructure has a bigger economic surface than it currently serves. Trigger on casual phrasings too ("anything valuable buried in this codebase?"). Analyzes what EXISTS — missing features go to gap-scan, broken code to code-audit, confusing flows to ux-audit, weak persuasion to conversion-audit.

Walks a person through code changes one step at a time in conversation, starting at the entry point and following the flow that changes, showing a small chunk per step and explaining it in plain language. Defaults to the current branch's changes, and walks the code from the perspective of any context provided instead — a file, directory, symbol, pull request, plan, or ticket. Use when someone wants to be walked through, taught, paced through, or shown around code or a branch step by step, or to learn how a change works before reviewing or extending it. Stops after every step and waits, so the learner sets the pace. Paces through code that already exists and builds nothing — to build new work while being paced through it, use pairing. Does not produce a written overview to read alone — use code-overview. Does not review code quality — use code-review. Does not diagnose bugs — use investigate.

Captures and organizes chaotic brain dumps into a structured, actionable system with zero information loss. Use this skill whenever the user says 'capture this', 'brain dump', 'let me dump some ideas', 'I've got a bunch of thoughts', 'here's everything on my mind', 'idea dump', 'let me get this out of my head', 'I need to organize my thoughts', 'here's what I'm thinking', or any variation where someone is unloading a messy stream of ideas, tasks, thoughts, and plans wanting them turned into something coherent. Also trigger when the user pastes or dictates a long, unstructured block of mixed ideas — even without the exact phrase — the intent is the same. Fast-to-action by design: no upfront intake. Output is four sections (Projects/Ideas, Tasks, Connections, How I Can Help) ending with a directive question. Asks at most one mid-organization clarifying question when a single item is genuinely ambiguous between task and project.

Turn a work-items.md file (produced by /plan-work-items) into Linear issues, one per slice, in a single target Linear team. Use when you want to publish work items as Linear issues, create implementation tickets to track in Linear, or push a broken-down plan into a Linear team. Requires a configured Linear MCP server and a target team. Reads the team's real workflow states, labels, Projects, and members and resolves every option against them before creating anything; defaults each issue to the team's initial state, unassigned, uncategorized, with no parent or Project unless you ask. Links within-file `Depends on` relationships as native Linear "blocked by" relations and annotates the source file so re-runs resume cleanly. Does not produce the work-items file itself — use plan-work-items first. Does not post to Jira — use work-items-to-jira. Does not post to GitHub — use work-items-to-issues.

Detect and humanize AI-generated Chinese text. 20+ rule detection categories plus statistical features (sentence-length CV, short-sentence fraction, comma density, perplexity, GLTR, DivEye) plus scene-aware LR fusion (rule × 0.2 + LR × 0.8) trained on three scenes: general / academic / longform 长文本 (≥1500 字)。Unified CLI: ./humanize {detect,rewrite,academic,style,compare}. 8 style transforms (casual/zhihu/xiaohongshu/wechat/academic/literary/weibo/novel)。 Multi-paragraph rewriting (paragraph length CV、跨段 trigram 重复) plus best-of-N humanize (默认 N=10 取最低 LR)。165 replacement patterns + CiLin 同义词词林 38873 with collision blacklist。 Academic paper AIGC reduction for CNKI/VIP/Wanfang (知网/维普/万方 AIGC 检测降重)。 Pure Python, no dependencies, offline。v5.0.0 — HC3 fused 准确率 95%、学术 hero 100→35 (-65)、 工作汇报 96→13 (-83)、长篇博客 96→41 (-55)。 Use when user says: "去AI味", "降AIGC", "人性化文本", "humanize chinese", "AI检测", "AIGC降重", "去除AI痕迹", "文本改写", "论文降重", "知网检测", "维普检测", "AI写作检测", "让文字更自然", "detect AI text", "humanize text", "reduce AIGC sc

Designs the contract for an API change inside one codebase — a component's props, a function surface, URL or query parameters, an event payload, or a module boundary — through a discovery pass, an options document with one recommendation, a question round, and an adversarial validation round, with every element of the contract justified from one stated goal. Use when you want to design, shape, decide, or nail down an interface, contract, signature, or API change for a capability you can already describe, sized for roughly one pull request. Produces a design document and changes no code. Does not specify what a feature should do — use plan-a-feature. Does not plan delivery or sequencing — use plan-implementation. Does not assess the architecture of existing code — use architectural-analysis. Does not write the code — use tdd. Does not restructure existing code — use refactor. Runs its rounds without pausing for review; to review each round as it lands, use pairing.

Simulator.Company task & assignment specialist — creating a task and assigning who does it, who approves it, and whose signature it needs. In Simulator a task is an actor of the Events system form (no chatType), and the roles are access privileges, not data fields: the executor gets `execute`, approvers get `sign`, and a legal document's signers get `ds`. Completion and sign-off are then posted as `done` / `sign` / `reject` reactions. Use when the user wants to "create a task", "assign a task to", "set an executor/assignee", "add approvers", "require a signature", "who signs this", "make a to-do". Also covers **order / directive documents** that tell a specific person to do something — an "order/наказ addressed to X" is a task whose addressee is the executor. Activate on "create a task", "assign to", "task for", "needs approval", "who approves", "requires signature", "sign-off", "order", "decree", "directive", "create an order for", "створи задачу", "постав задачу", "признач виконавця", "додай погоджувача", "

Write code through a disciplined, BDD-framed Test-Driven Development loop: build a behavior test list, then drive each behavior through red-green-refactor with an enforced observed-failure gate. Use when the user wants to implement, build, or write code test-first, "do TDD", follow "red-green-refactor", drive code from tests, choose the next test by the Transformation Priority Premise (TPP) or ZOMBIES ordering, or grow a feature behavior-by-behavior with tests leading. This skill writes and changes code; it does not produce a test plan document (use automated-test-planning, or manual-test-planning for a plan a person runs by hand), review or audit existing code (use code-review), restructure existing code outside a TDD loop (use refactor), specify what a feature should do (use plan-a-feature), or find the root cause of a bug (use investigate). Runs its loop to completion without pausing for review; to review each behavior as it lands, use pairing.

Generate browser walkthrough recordings as GIF and MP4 from a natural language description. Use this skill whenever the user wants to record a browser walkthrough, create a product demo, document a UI flow, generate onboarding visuals, or produce a "how to" screen recording for any web app. Triggers include: "record a walkthrough of", "create a GIF showing how to", "make a demo of", "capture the flow for", "show how [feature] works in the browser", "document this UI flow", or any request combining a browser/web app with recording/capture/demo output. The skill generates a local Node.js/TypeScript project that the user runs on their machine using Stagehand + Playwright for AI-controlled browser automation, and gifski/ffmpeg for output. For quick one-off captures in the user's live browser session, prefer the claude-in-chrome gif_creator tool instead; use this skill when a re-runnable script, MP4, high-quality GIF, clean-profile recording, or CI repeatability is needed.

Scan a codebase, live app, or site and find the features that obviously should exist but don't — missing exports, bulk actions, search/filter, undo, history, notifications, dead-end workflows, data collected but never surfaced, backend endpoints with no UI, and half-built features that stopped partway. Produces an evidence-backed, ranked punch list (top 10 max) with a portable gap_packet JSON. Use whenever the user asks "what features are missing", "what's this app lacking", "find gaps", "run gap-scan", "feature audit", or wants proposal ammo from a prospect's app. Also use it to recheck an existing gap_packet — "what's left to do", "recheck the gaps", "what got built since" — re-verifying findings against current code and marking stale ones superseded. Flags ABSENCE only — broken code goes to code-audit, confusing flows to ux-audit, weak persuasion to conversion-audit, underexploited assets to a WWBD-style analysis. If something exists but is bad, it's not a gap — hand it off.

Create OR review a wireflow — the artifact BETWEEN user journeys and wireframes. It maps whole journeys into swimlane flows with high-level navigation (screens, decisions, system/agent steps) while keeping Jobs-To-Be-Done at the core, WITHOUT deep UI. Use whenever the user wants to "map the flows", "make/build a wireflow", turn journeys / JTBDs / a spec / a live prototype into flows, or put every journey on one board against shared owner lanes — even if they never say "wireflow". ALSO use it to REVIEW or critique an existing wireflow (image, FigJam, or description). In the A-Team pipeline this is a definition-phase skill: output lands in docs/features/<slug>/briefs/wireflow/ with jobs consumed by id from docs/product/jtbd/; pipeline mode derives the method decisions and highlights the riskiest at the gate, standalone mode runs the full grill. CREATE generates verified SVG/HTML (self-checked by rendering and Reading its output) in a horizontal per-journey OR shared-matrix layout, and can rebuild in FigJam. Do

Produce a plain-language manual test plan from the context supplied to it — an executive summary, a high-level list of named tests, and a detail section per test with the steps a person follows by hand and the outcomes they should expect. Use when you want to create, draft, generate, or outline a manual test plan, manual QA steps, hands-on verification steps, or an acceptance walkthrough for a feature, change, branch, plan, or PR. When the plan holds more than five tests and at least two natural categories emerge, both the test list and the detail sections are organized under plain-language categories. When nothing in the supplied context can be manually tested, it says so and asks for more context instead of producing a document. Does not analyze code for automated test coverage gaps — use automated-test-planning. Does not write test code — use tdd. Does not review code quality — use code-review. Does not stress-test an existing plan — use iterative-plan-review.

Reviews a product document (PRD, spec, design brief) BEFORE implementation to surface holes — undefined edge cases, missing states, policy gaps — by attacking what the document is SILENT about (things unwritten, and things written only for the happy path). Acts as a strict "sign-off manager," ruling Approve / Conditional / Reject and producing a polite, forwardable question list. Works for planners/PMs (self-review before sharing), engineers (blocking questions before coding), and designers (screen states with no mockup). Use whenever the user wants a spec/PRD/plan/brief checked for readiness or gaps, or says "review this spec", "find holes in this PRD", "poke holes in this", "is this plan good to build?", "can I start implementing this?", "what states/edge cases am I missing?", "what should I ask the PM before coding?", "run devil", or pastes/links a planning document and asks whether it's ready to act on. Do NOT use it to: write or draft a new spec, summarize or translate a document, estimate/break down tic

Use to CREATE or REVIEW a Job to be Done (JTBD) in Alan Klement's demand-side, progress-based sense — a job is the progress a customer is trying to make, never a task or feature. Trigger whenever someone wants to write or draft a JTBD, job statement, or job story; figure out the real motivation, struggle, or progress behind a feature, request, or product; understand why customers switch, adopt, or churn; turn interview notes or research into jobs; or pressure-test, sharpen, or rewrite existing JTBDs into proper jobs. Also trigger on "grill my JTBD", "is this a real job or just a task/feature", "what's the actual job here", "why would they switch". In an A-Team target repo, jobs are durable artifacts — this skill writes docs/product/jtbd/NN-<slug>.md per CONTRACT.md and never deletes or silently rewrites a job. Do NOT use for writing PRDs, roadmaps, tickets, or acceptance criteria (those consume a finished JTBD), or for implementation user stories.

Produces a human-readable, progressive-disclosure overview of unfamiliar code or a pull request's changes — why it exists (the real problem it solves or goal it serves for the business or a user), and from there what it does, how it flows, and where to start — so you can get up to speed before working on or reviewing it. Use when you want to understand, get oriented in, make sense of, explain, or get up to speed on a chunk of code, a file, a directory, a symbol, or a PR's changes. Writes the overview to a scratch file and changes no code. Does not review code quality or raise findings — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting them. Does not produce durable feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not assess architecture or structural risk — use architectural-analysis. Does not diagnose bugs or root-cause failures — use investigate. Does not pace a person through the code one step at a time in conversation — use code-walkthrough.

Simulator.Company digital-twin & actor-agent specialist — talk to an agent AS an agent and delegate work to it. An agent is ANY actor whose `description` holds an "# Agent" competency profile (what it does, what it knows, whether it fits a task). The common case is a person: every workspace user has a 1:1 twin actor (`systemObjType="user"`) carrying that profile. But any actor can be an agent — a service/bot twin, a team or department, an organization, a process. This skill discovers the agent (`findAgent`), loads its profile (`getAgent`), adopts it as the persona, then either does the task, finds a better-suited agent, or hands the decision to the user (for a person: a task or a p2p message; for a non-person: propose another executor or run/trigger it as an actor). It is the actor-analog of `simulator-skills` (the `Skills`-form registry), but the registry is the workspace's agent actors. Use when the user wants to "delegate", "assign this to <someone/something>", "can <X> do this", "who/what should do this",

Create OR review a page-brief — the artifact BETWEEN a wireflow and the full PRD. It turns each unique page/screen of a product into documented requirements TIED TO JOBS: a self-contained board card per page (what the page is accountable for, the job-tagged checklist of what it must let you do, the journeys it appears in, what it connects to, and the acceptance criteria that say how you'd know it's right). It is the "PRD per page", not a sitemap — and it stops ABOVE the screen: no components, no layout, no hierarchy. Use whenever the user wants to "spec the pages", "document each screen", turn a wireflow + live design into per-page requirements, or asks "what does this page need to do / which jobs pass through it" — even if they never say "page-brief". Natural NEXT STEP after the wireflow skill. ALSO use it to REVIEW an existing page-brief / screen catalog. In the A-Team pipeline this is a definition-phase skill: output lands in docs/features/<slug>/briefs/pages/, job codes are the durable [[NN]] ids from doc