Results for “discourse”

Write natural, subtext-rich dialogue that sounds distinct per character.

Use when a manager, dispatcher, or safety director needs to have a coaching conversation with a driver — about a safety event (harsh brake, hard turn, distraction), an HOS violation, a customer complaint, a missed delivery, repeated minor incidents, or to deliver positive recognition. Covers conversation structure, language, documentation, and escalation.

Establishes a two-party working posture where the user directs and the agent executes, surfacing every genuine fork as a batched single-select question with a recommended default.

Facilitates a multi-perspective discussion on Austrian economics between Hayek, Mises, and Claude, analyzing user questions through their distinct philosophical lenses.

Create realistic multi-speaker dialogue audio using Dia TTS via the inference.sh CLI, with control over speaker tags, emotion, pacing, and conversation structure.

Pauses mid-conversation to reassess direction, assumptions, and bias, then recommends whether to continue, pivot, or pause.

Build and sharpen a project's domain model — a CONTEXT.md glossary and ubiquitous language. Use when pinning down terminology, or the agent "uses the wrong words". Repo decision-memory system (INDEX.md, rejected alternatives) → docs-adr.

Select and configure a structured discussion protocol matched to the purpose, topic, and group readiness. Use when planning classroom discussions, Socratic seminars, or structured debate.

Generate follow-up teaching moves that extend student thinking after a specific classroom response. Use when a student says something worth exploring and the teacher wants to deepen the dialogue.

Two-party working posture — user as director, agent as executor. Every fork, tradeoff, and taste choice is surfaced via batched AskUserQuestion with structural framing, a recommended default, and concrete previews when comparison is visual, so the human steers direction while the agent handles implementation. Eliminates the review-bottleneck (no giant diff to approve at the end — review is distributed across picks) and prevents codebase-understanding debt (the user remembers the architecture because they picked it). Use whenever the user invokes /duet, or says "work with me", "ask before", "check with me", "I want to decide", "don't assume", "human-in-the-loop", "co-author", "pair with me", "duet", or whenever a task clearly involves aesthetic, architectural, or irreversible strategic decisions — even without those exact words. Pair with the Duet output style to minimize cognitive load between picks.

Decision-grade entity research skill — produces a hypothesis-tested dossier on a specific company, person, nonprofit, or government org, not a generic profile. Forcing intake makes the user state their hypothesis upfront (what they already believe and want to verify or disprove) so the dossier tests it rather than confirms it. Output is an editable Word document (.docx) with verdict on the hypothesis, identity facts, 12-month activity timeline, network and reputation signals, red flags, conversation hooks tied to specific findings, and source-provenance audit log. Uses WebSearch + WebFetch + free APIs (SEC EDGAR, GitHub, ProPublica) as workhorses; optional BYOK MCPs enhance coverage. Use when the user asks for background research, diligence, or meeting prep on a specific entity (e.g., 'prep me for a meeting with [person/company]', 'due diligence on [company]'). Honors sensitivity exclusions for journalism + personal-vetting contexts.

Produces a decision-grade dossier on a specific company, person, nonprofit, or government org by testing the user's hypothesis rather than confirming it. Outputs an editable Word document with verdict, identity facts, 12-month activity timeline, network and reputation signals, and red flags.

Multi-source recency research skill that takes the pulse of any topic across Reddit, Hacker News, the open web, and optionally X/Twitter within a configurable recent window (default 30 days). Forcing intake clarifies topic specificity, angle (trend/sentiment/problems/opportunities/comparison), time window, and platform scope before searching. Returns a synthesized briefing with citations, engagement metrics, and cross-platform pattern analysis. Use when the user requests multi-source recency intelligence on a topic (e.g., 'pulse on [topic]', 'what's happening with [topic]', 'what are people saying about [topic]', 'current conversation about [topic]', 'take the pulse of [topic]', 'trending: [topic]', 'find me info on [topic]'), and for competitor research, trend discovery, tool comparisons, and audience sentiment analysis.

Multi-source recency research skill that takes the pulse of any topic across Reddit, Hacker News, the open web, and optionally X/Twitter within a configurable recent window (default 30 days).

Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates documentation (CONTEXT.md, ADRs) inline as decisions crystallise. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's language and documented decisions.

Documentation and capabilities reference for Daily

Documentation and capabilities reference for Daily

Police the project's vocabulary — bust vague terms, keep the CONTEXT.md glossary sharp, and lock in decisions worth remembering as ADRs. Use when the user debates naming, says "what should we call this", asks to pin down terminology, wants a decision recorded, or when another skill (hot-seat, whiteboard) surfaces a decision that clears the ADR bar. Just reading the glossary for vocabulary is NOT this skill — trigger only when the words or decisions are being changed.

Generates concise product copy for buttons, empty states, errors, toasts, confirmations, and form guidance using a casual but polite tone.

Structure compelling design presentations for stakeholders, reviews, and showcases.

吕秀才（情景喜剧虚构）认知与表达框架（压缩蒸馏）：子曰嘴炮、读书人迂阔与意外高光 触发：武林外传 等。虚构

Diagnoses whether a draft will resonate with its audience using a five-dimension communication psychology framework, identifies structural problems, and gives specific fixes.

Documentation and capabilities reference for Daily

Runs a relentless interview that sharpens a plan or design and creates docs (ADRs and glossary) along the way. Use when the user wants to stress-test a plan or design, or produce decision records.

Guides developers through Socratic exploration of ideas, offering research and routing outputs to planning artifacts.

Write clear, plain prose and strip register-jargon from text, using a costume-or-term-of-art test to preserve genuine technical terms.

Extracts and formalizes domain terminology from a conversation into a consistent glossary saved to a local file.

Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates documentation (CONTEXT.md, ADRs) inline as decisions crystallise. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's language and documented decisions.

Runs a structured interview that stress-tests a plan against the project's domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates CONTEXT.md and ADRs inline as decisions are made.

Compacts the current conversation into a handoff document for another agent to pick up, referencing existing artifacts by path or URL instead of duplicating them.

Domain-Driven Design methodology using bounded contexts, ubiquitous language, and strategic/tactical patterns

Design a multi-round questioning sequence for interrogating AI chatbot answers, tracking how responses shift and distinguishing genuine updates from sycophantic capitulation. Use when teaching students to probe AI critically.

Analyzes why a piece of content resonates with audiences using five classic communication theories, identifies the emotional core and effective stance, and outputs discussion directions for a chatroom.

Plan customer discovery conversations with hypotheses, prompts, probes, and capture fields.