[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M6C22VV421P82ZT0PR09P4BQ":3,"skill-same:01M6C22VV421P82ZT0PR09P4BQ":86},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":15,"categories":16,"keywords":17,"publishedAt":29,"linkOnly":30,"markdownContent":31,"markdownBody":32,"frontMatter":33,"refName":38,"commitSha":39,"skillDirectory":40,"forksCount":13,"repositoryHtmlUrl":41,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":42,"ownerBlogUrl":6,"ownerDescription":6,"updatedAt":43,"install":44,"resources":57},"01M6C22VV421P82ZT0PR09P4BQ","reflect",null,"Mid-conversation reflection skill that pauses execution and zooms out from detail-mode to honestly reassess direction, assumptions, and bias. Use when the user says 'reflect', 'take a step back', 'step back', 'zoom out', 'are we missing something', 'bigger picture', 'sanity check this', 'are we on track', 'are we overthinking this', 'forest for the trees', or any variation signaling intent to break out of detail-mode and reassess. Also trigger when the conversation has gone deep on implementation details without strategic check-in, or when the user shows signs of being stuck — that's often a signal the framing needs a reset, not more detail work. Intentionally low-intake: runs the 5-dimension analysis immediately when prior context is rich enough; asks one forcing clarifier only when invocation context is too thin to reassess from.","mne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi","mne20114-hash","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F224168109?v=4","01M6C0JCR7334CZ39YWTZXX2NG","01M6C0JCWN0NBWMQTW1CPG2Z4G",0,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fproductivity\u002Freflect\u002Fskills\u002Freflect\u002FSKILL.md",[],[5,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28],"intake","reassess","execution","analysis","zoom out","direct","work","check","context","user","use","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nname: reflect\ndescription: \"Mid-conversation reflection skill that pauses execution and zooms out from detail-mode to honestly reassess direction, assumptions, and bias. Use when the user says 'reflect', 'take a step back', 'step back', 'zoom out', 'are we missing something', 'bigger picture', 'sanity check this', 'are we on track', 'are we overthinking this', 'forest for the trees', or any variation signaling intent to break out of detail-mode and reassess. Also trigger when the conversation has gone deep on implementation details without strategic check-in, or when the user shows signs of being stuck — that's often a signal the framing needs a reset, not more detail work. Intentionally low-intake: runs the 5-dimension analysis immediately when prior context is rich enough; asks one forcing clarifier only when invocation context is too thin to reassess from.\"\nlicense: MIT\nmetadata:\n  source_spec: \"megaprompts\u002F02-reflect-megaprompt.md\"\n  build_pattern: \"Path B (direct conversion)\"\n  version: 1.0.0\n---\n\n# Reflect — Mid-Conversation Reassessment\n\n> **Portability:** Pure-reasoning skill. No external tools required. Works in Claude Code CLI + Claude.ai web natively. Most portable in the v2 collection.\n\nWhen invoked mid-conversation, this skill **pauses execution** and produces a frank reassessment of where the conversation has been heading. Output is **flowing analysis (no headers, conversational tone)** covering macro perspective, gap analysis, reflective inquiry, bias check, and contextual alignment. The skill ends with a clear directional recommendation: **continue, pivot, or pause to answer a specific question**.\n\n## Invocation Triggers\n\n**Explicit phrases:**\n\n- \"reflect\"\n- \"take a step back\" \u002F \"step back\"\n- \"zoom out\"\n- \"are we missing something\"\n- \"bigger picture\"\n- \"what are we missing\"\n- \"let's pause\"\n- \"sanity check this\"\n- \"are we on track\"\n- \"are we overthinking this\"\n- \"forest for the trees\"\n\n**Implicit signals (no phrase needed):**\n\n- Conversation has gone 10+ turns deep on implementation details without strategic check-in\n- User shows signs of frustration or stuck-ness\n- Repeated dead-ends or pivots within a short span\n\nWhen you detect an implicit trigger, **don't auto-invoke** — ask the user if they want to step back. Implicit signals are a prompt to OFFER reflection, not to unilaterally run it.\n\n## Stop Directive (Before Reassessing)\n\n**Halt the current thread.** Don't continue execution of the in-progress task. Reflection is a pause, not a side-quest.\n\nThis matters because:\n- Continuing detail work while \"reflecting on the side\" defeats the purpose — you'll over-weight the current direction\n- The user expects a clear break in cadence\n- The reassessment needs full attention to the conversation history\n\n## Grill-Me Optional Clarifier\n\nThis skill is intentionally **low-intake** — most invocations should run the 5-dimension analysis immediately without questions. The grill-me discipline applies *only* when the invocation is ambiguous (e.g., user pastes \"step back\" at the start of a fresh conversation with no prior context to reassess).\n\n### Q1 (optional, asked only when context is too thin to reassess)\n\n> **What specifically should I reassess? Pick one:**\n>\n> 1. The goal — are we solving the right problem?\n> 2. The approach — is the path we're on the best one?\n> 3. The assumptions — what are we taking for granted?\n> 4. All of the above (default if you have time)\n>\n> *Why I'm asking:* I'm seeing limited prior context to reassess, so I want to focus the reflection rather than guess. If you'd rather I do all three, that's fine — say so.\n\nForcing choice with default. **Asked only when context is genuinely thin; otherwise skip and run the full analysis on existing conversation.**\n\n**Stop condition:** One question max. If the user invokes mid-conversation with normal context, no questions are asked — the skill runs directly.\n\n## The 5-Dimension Analysis Framework\n\nRe-read the **full conversation from the original goal forward** — not just recent turns. The discipline that distinguishes real reflection from local-context summary.\n\n### 1. Macro Perspective\n\n- **Original goal:** What did the user actually start trying to do?\n- **Drift detection:** Has the conversation moved away from that goal? Toward something better or worse?\n- **Connection check:** How does current work connect to the larger objective?\n\nAnchor with specific evidence: \"At turn 3 the goal was X; by turn 12 we're working on Y. Is Y a productive narrowing of X, or a drift away?\"\n\n### 2. Gap Analysis\n\n- **Unverified assumptions** — what are we taking for granted that we haven't checked?\n- **Missing stakeholders \u002F audiences \u002F users** — who needs this beyond the immediate context?\n- **Skipped constraints** — technical, regulatory, resource limits not addressed\n- **Dismissed alternatives** — paths considered but rejected; revisit briefly\n- **External factors** — timing, market, dependencies not in scope\n\n### 3. Reflective Inquiry\n\n- Is the problem framed correctly?\n- Solving the right problem vs. an adjacent easier one?\n- Simpler path being overcomplicated?\n- Harder but more valuable path being avoided?\n- **Fresh-eyes perspective:** would someone else approach this differently?\n\n### 4. Bias Check\n\nFive biases — recognize each through specific conversation patterns:\n\n| Bias | Recognition cue |\n|---|---|\n| **Confirmation bias** | Evidence cited only supports the working hypothesis; counter-evidence absent or dismissed |\n| **Sunk cost fallacy** | \"We've already invested X\" \u002F \"we're far enough in to...\" instead of fresh cost\u002Fbenefit |\n| **Anchoring** | Stuck on first option mentioned; new options compared against it rather than evaluated independently |\n| **Complexity bias** | Adding features \u002F steps \u002F safeguards without specific justification for each |\n| **Recency bias** | Over-weighting last few turns; older but important context being ignored |\n\nFor each detected bias: name it, cite the specific evidence, suggest a corrective move.\n\nSee [`references\u002Fcognitive_bias_canon.md`](references\u002Fcognitive_bias_canon.md) for the full canon.\n\n### 5. Contextual Alignment\n\n- Does the direction serve the user's actual goals (as known from context)?\n- Are external factors being ignored?\n- Is this the best use of the user's time and energy right now?\n- Connection to other known projects or priorities?\n\n## Tone and Format Rules\n\nThe skill must produce:\n\n- **Flowing prose** — no headers, no bullet lists, no structured-report formatting\n- **Tight but thorough** — neither a one-liner nor a wall of text\n- **Direct critique when warranted** — with specific evidence from the conversation\n- **Validation when warranted** — with specific reasoning for why the path is solid\n- **No vague reassurance** — \"looks good!\" without reasoning is rejected\n- **No manufactured problems** — when the path is genuinely solid, say so with specific reasons; don't invent issues\n\nSee [`references\u002Fhonest_output_discipline.md`](references\u002Fhonest_output_discipline.md) for the anti-manufactured-problems framing.\n\n## Closing Recommendation (Mandatory)\n\nEvery run ends with one of three directional recommendations:\n\n| Recommendation | When | Format |\n|---|---|---|\n| **Continue** | Path is solid | \"Continue. {specific reasoning for why}.\" |\n| **Pivot to {X}** | Drift has occurred OR better path surfaced | \"Pivot toward {X}, away from {what to drop}. {specific evidence}.\" |\n| **Pause for {Q}** | A specific question needs answering before continuing | \"Pause for {Q}. Without answering this, the next step risks {specific cost}.\" |\n\nThe closing is always specific — never \"you should think more about this\" or \"consider your options.\"\n\n## Error Handling\n\n| Situation | Behavior |\n|---|---|\n| Conversation is very short (no real context to reassess) | Acknowledge limitation, ask user what they want reassessed (Q1 fires) |\n| Current direction is genuinely solid | State this clearly with reasoning; don't manufacture problems |\n| User invokes mid-task with no clear question | Default to macro perspective + bias check; offer to dig deeper |\n| Implicit trigger seems possible but unclear | Don't invoke proactively; ask user if they want to step back |\n\n## Tooling\n\n| Script | Role |\n|---|---|\n| `scripts\u002Fbias_pattern_detector.py` | Scan conversation text for patterns indicative of each of the 5 biases |\n| `scripts\u002Fconversation_depth_analyzer.py` | Count turns + detect implicit-trigger signals (10+ detail turns, frustration markers) |\n| `scripts\u002Fdirectional_recommendation_validator.py` | Verify output ends with Continue \u002F Pivot \u002F Pause + specific reasoning |\n\n## References\n\n- [`references\u002Fcognitive_bias_canon.md`](references\u002Fcognitive_bias_canon.md) — 5 biases + recognition cues (7+ sources)\n- [`references\u002Fhonest_output_discipline.md`](references\u002Fhonest_output_discipline.md) — anti-manufactured-problems framing (7+ sources)\n- [`references\u002Fconversation_reflection_practice.md`](references\u002Fconversation_reflection_practice.md) — Schön reflective-practice canon (7+ sources)\n\n## Anti-Patterns To Reject\n\n- Hardcoded user names or specific domain references\n- Structured-report output (headers, bullet lists) when prose is required\n- Manufactured problems when things are actually fine\n- Vague reassurance (\"looks good!\") instead of specific reasoning\n- Reassessing only recent turns instead of the full conversation\n- Skipping the closing directional recommendation\n- Continuing the in-progress task while \"reflecting on the side\"\n\n---\n\n**Version:** 1.0.0\n**Source spec:** `megaprompts\u002F02-reflect-megaprompt.md` (maintainer-local draft spec — gitignored, not present in the public repository)\n**Build pattern:** Path B (direct conversion). Productivity light-prompt-flow sibling of capture.\n","# Reflect — Mid-Conversation Reassessment\n\n> **Portability:** Pure-reasoning skill. No external tools required. Works in Claude Code CLI + Claude.ai web natively. Most portable in the v2 collection.\n\nWhen invoked mid-conversation, this skill **pauses execution** and produces a frank reassessment of where the conversation has been heading. Output is **flowing analysis (no headers, conversational tone)** covering macro perspective, gap analysis, reflective inquiry, bias check, and contextual alignment. The skill ends with a clear directional recommendation: **continue, pivot, or pause to answer a specific question**.\n\n## Invocation Triggers\n\n**Explicit phrases:**\n\n- \"reflect\"\n- \"take a step back\" \u002F \"step back\"\n- \"zoom out\"\n- \"are we missing something\"\n- \"bigger picture\"\n- \"what are we missing\"\n- \"let's pause\"\n- \"sanity check this\"\n- \"are we on track\"\n- \"are we overthinking this\"\n- \"forest for the trees\"\n\n**Implicit signals (no phrase needed):**\n\n- Conversation has gone 10+ turns deep on implementation details without strategic check-in\n- User shows signs of frustration or stuck-ness\n- Repeated dead-ends or pivots within a short span\n\nWhen you detect an implicit trigger, **don't auto-invoke** — ask the user if they want to step back. Implicit signals are a prompt to OFFER reflection, not to unilaterally run it.\n\n## Stop Directive (Before Reassessing)\n\n**Halt the current thread.** Don't continue execution of the in-progress task. Reflection is a pause, not a side-quest.\n\nThis matters because:\n- Continuing detail work while \"reflecting on the side\" defeats the purpose — you'll over-weight the current direction\n- The user expects a clear break in cadence\n- The reassessment needs full attention to the conversation history\n\n## Grill-Me Optional Clarifier\n\nThis skill is intentionally **low-intake** — most invocations should run the 5-dimension analysis immediately without questions. The grill-me discipline applies *only* when the invocation is ambiguous (e.g., user pastes \"step back\" at the start of a fresh conversation with no prior context to reassess).\n\n### Q1 (optional, asked only when context is too thin to reassess)\n\n> **What specifically should I reassess? Pick one:**\n>\n> 1. The goal — are we solving the right problem?\n> 2. The approach — is the path we're on the best one?\n> 3. The assumptions — what are we taking for granted?\n> 4. All of the above (default if you have time)\n>\n> *Why I'm asking:* I'm seeing limited prior context to reassess, so I want to focus the reflection rather than guess. If you'd rather I do all three, that's fine — say so.\n\nForcing choice with default. **Asked only when context is genuinely thin; otherwise skip and run the full analysis on existing conversation.**\n\n**Stop condition:** One question max. If the user invokes mid-conversation with normal context, no questions are asked — the skill runs directly.\n\n## The 5-Dimension Analysis Framework\n\nRe-read the **full conversation from the original goal forward** — not just recent turns. The discipline that distinguishes real reflection from local-context summary.\n\n### 1. Macro Perspective\n\n- **Original goal:** What did the user actually start trying to do?\n- **Drift detection:** Has the conversation moved away from that goal? Toward something better or worse?\n- **Connection check:** How does current work connect to the larger objective?\n\nAnchor with specific evidence: \"At turn 3 the goal was X; by turn 12 we're working on Y. Is Y a productive narrowing of X, or a drift away?\"\n\n### 2. Gap Analysis\n\n- **Unverified assumptions** — what are we taking for granted that we haven't checked?\n- **Missing stakeholders \u002F audiences \u002F users** — who needs this beyond the immediate context?\n- **Skipped constraints** — technical, regulatory, resource limits not addressed\n- **Dismissed alternatives** — paths considered but rejected; revisit briefly\n- **External factors** — timing, market, dependencies not in scope\n\n### 3. Reflective Inquiry\n\n- Is the problem framed correctly?\n- Solving the right problem vs. an adjacent easier one?\n- Simpler path being overcomplicated?\n- Harder but more valuable path being avoided?\n- **Fresh-eyes perspective:** would someone else approach this differently?\n\n### 4. Bias Check\n\nFive biases — recognize each through specific conversation patterns:\n\n| Bias | Recognition cue |\n|---|---|\n| **Confirmation bias** | Evidence cited only supports the working hypothesis; counter-evidence absent or dismissed |\n| **Sunk cost fallacy** | \"We've already invested X\" \u002F \"we're far enough in to...\" instead of fresh cost\u002Fbenefit |\n| **Anchoring** | Stuck on first option mentioned; new options compared against it rather than evaluated independently |\n| **Complexity bias** | Adding features \u002F steps \u002F safeguards without specific justification for each |\n| **Recency bias** | Over-weighting last few turns; older but important context being ignored |\n\nFor each detected bias: name it, cite the specific evidence, suggest a corrective move.\n\nSee [`references\u002Fcognitive_bias_canon.md`](references\u002Fcognitive_bias_canon.md) for the full canon.\n\n### 5. Contextual Alignment\n\n- Does the direction serve the user's actual goals (as known from context)?\n- Are external factors being ignored?\n- Is this the best use of the user's time and energy right now?\n- Connection to other known projects or priorities?\n\n## Tone and Format Rules\n\nThe skill must produce:\n\n- **Flowing prose** — no headers, no bullet lists, no structured-report formatting\n- **Tight but thorough** — neither a one-liner nor a wall of text\n- **Direct critique when warranted** — with specific evidence from the conversation\n- **Validation when warranted** — with specific reasoning for why the path is solid\n- **No vague reassurance** — \"looks good!\" without reasoning is rejected\n- **No manufactured problems** — when the path is genuinely solid, say so with specific reasons; don't invent issues\n\nSee [`references\u002Fhonest_output_discipline.md`](references\u002Fhonest_output_discipline.md) for the anti-manufactured-problems framing.\n\n## Closing Recommendation (Mandatory)\n\nEvery run ends with one of three directional recommendations:\n\n| Recommendation | When | Format |\n|---|---|---|\n| **Continue** | Path is solid | \"Continue. {specific reasoning for why}.\" |\n| **Pivot to {X}** | Drift has occurred OR better path surfaced | \"Pivot toward {X}, away from {what to drop}. {specific evidence}.\" |\n| **Pause for {Q}** | A specific question needs answering before continuing | \"Pause for {Q}. Without answering this, the next step risks {specific cost}.\" |\n\nThe closing is always specific — never \"you should think more about this\" or \"consider your options.\"\n\n## Error Handling\n\n| Situation | Behavior |\n|---|---|\n| Conversation is very short (no real context to reassess) | Acknowledge limitation, ask user what they want reassessed (Q1 fires) |\n| Current direction is genuinely solid | State this clearly with reasoning; don't manufacture problems |\n| User invokes mid-task with no clear question | Default to macro perspective + bias check; offer to dig deeper |\n| Implicit trigger seems possible but unclear | Don't invoke proactively; ask user if they want to step back |\n\n## Tooling\n\n| Script | Role |\n|---|---|\n| `scripts\u002Fbias_pattern_detector.py` | Scan conversation text for patterns indicative of each of the 5 biases |\n| `scripts\u002Fconversation_depth_analyzer.py` | Count turns + detect implicit-trigger signals (10+ detail turns, frustration markers) |\n| `scripts\u002Fdirectional_recommendation_validator.py` | Verify output ends with Continue \u002F Pivot \u002F Pause + specific reasoning |\n\n## References\n\n- [`references\u002Fcognitive_bias_canon.md`](references\u002Fcognitive_bias_canon.md) — 5 biases + recognition cues (7+ sources)\n- [`references\u002Fhonest_output_discipline.md`](references\u002Fhonest_output_discipline.md) — anti-manufactured-problems framing (7+ sources)\n- [`references\u002Fconversation_reflection_practice.md`](references\u002Fconversation_reflection_practice.md) — Schön reflective-practice canon (7+ sources)\n\n## Anti-Patterns To Reject\n\n- Hardcoded user names or specific domain references\n- Structured-report output (headers, bullet lists) when prose is required\n- Manufactured problems when things are actually fine\n- Vague reassurance (\"looks good!\") instead of specific reasoning\n- Reassessing only recent turns instead of the full conversation\n- Skipping the closing directional recommendation\n- Continuing the in-progress task while \"reflecting on the side\"\n\n---\n\n**Version:** 1.0.0\n**Source spec:** `megaprompts\u002F02-reflect-megaprompt.md` (maintainer-local draft spec — gitignored, not present in the public repository)\n**Build pattern:** Path B (direct conversion). Productivity light-prompt-flow sibling of capture.\n",{"name":5,"license":14,"metadata":34,"description":7},{"version":35,"source_spec":36,"build_pattern":37},"1.0.0","megaprompts\u002F02-reflect-megaprompt.md","Path B (direct conversion)","main","510dd2917e051cc953dc55f56fd6ef442aa01b38","claude-skills\u002Fproductivity\u002Freflect\u002Fskills\u002Freflect","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash","2026-10-28 07:50:31",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":45,"prompt":55,"zipAvailable":56},[46,49,52],{"tool":47,"command":48},"npx","npx skills add mne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi --skill reflect",{"tool":50,"command":51},"bunx","bunx skills add mne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi --skill reflect",{"tool":53,"command":54},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add mne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi --skill reflect","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fproductivity\u002Freflect\u002Fskills\u002Freflect\u002FSKILL.md",true,[58,64,68,72,78,82],{"path":59,"resourceType":60,"resourceTypeDesc":61,"sizeBytes":62,"sourceHtmlUrl":63},"references\u002Fcognitive_bias_canon.md","REFERENCE","参考文档",8450,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fproductivity\u002Freflect\u002Fskills\u002Freflect\u002Freferences\u002Fcognitive_bias_canon.md",{"path":65,"resourceType":60,"resourceTypeDesc":61,"sizeBytes":66,"sourceHtmlUrl":67},"references\u002Fconversation_reflection_practice.md",8758,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fproductivity\u002Freflect\u002Fskills\u002Freflect\u002Freferences\u002Fconversation_reflection_practice.md",{"path":69,"resourceType":60,"resourceTypeDesc":61,"sizeBytes":70,"sourceHtmlUrl":71},"references\u002Fhonest_output_discipline.md",9693,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fproductivity\u002Freflect\u002Fskills\u002Freflect\u002Freferences\u002Fhonest_output_discipline.md",{"path":73,"resourceType":74,"resourceTypeDesc":75,"sizeBytes":76,"sourceHtmlUrl":77},"scripts\u002Fbias_pattern_detector.py","SCRIPT","脚本",7280,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fproductivity\u002Freflect\u002Fskills\u002Freflect\u002Fscripts\u002Fbias_pattern_detector.py",{"path":79,"resourceType":74,"resourceTypeDesc":75,"sizeBytes":80,"sourceHtmlUrl":81},"scripts\u002Fconversation_depth_analyzer.py",7165,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fproductivity\u002Freflect\u002Fskills\u002Freflect\u002Fscripts\u002Fconversation_depth_analyzer.py",{"path":83,"resourceType":74,"resourceTypeDesc":75,"sizeBytes":84,"sourceHtmlUrl":85},"scripts\u002Fdirectional_recommendation_validator.py",9649,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fproductivity\u002Freflect\u002Fskills\u002Freflect\u002Fscripts\u002Fdirectional_recommendation_validator.py",[87,123,143,166,190,210],{"skillNo":88,"name":89,"nameZh":6,"description":90,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":91,"categories":92,"keywords":106,"publishedAt":29},"01M6C27N3H0F9RGG2KASPASH04","syllabus","Generates a curated supplementary reading list from any course syllabus using Consensus academic search. Grill-me intake (syllabus input format + course audience + year range) plus a grouping forcing-options checkpoint before any search runs — so the reading list matches the course's level and recency need. Parses the syllabus to extract topics and learning outcomes, searches Consensus for recent peer-reviewed papers per topic, and produces a professionally formatted .docx with clickable Consensus links, plain-language summaries calibrated to audience level, and Bloom-higher-order discussion questions tied to course learning goals. Use when the user uploads a syllabus, course outline, or curriculum document and wants supplementary readings (e.g., 'create a reading list from this syllabus', 'find recent papers for my course') — even casual mentions with a syllabus attached should trigger this skill.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fresearch\u002Fsyllabus\u002Fskills\u002Fsyllabus\u002FSKILL.md",[93,98,101],{"categoryNo":94,"categoryName":95,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000002","文档处理","SCENARIO","使用场景",{"categoryNo":99,"categoryName":100,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000023","Skill与智能体开发",{"categoryNo":102,"categoryName":103,"taxonomyType":104,"taxonomyTypeDesc":105},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000034","行政与办公人员","PROFESSION","适用职业",[89,107,108,109,18,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,23,117,118,119,120,121,28,122],"docx","pr","create","search","audit","integrity","checkpoint","learning","js","format","Rules","find","consensus","list","extract","outcomes",{"skillNo":124,"name":125,"nameZh":6,"description":126,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":127,"categories":128,"keywords":133,"publishedAt":29},"01M6C27DMGZ4D6ERNHSVA8H8RJ","pulse","Multi-source recency research skill that takes the pulse of any topic across Reddit, Hacker News, the open web, and optionally X\u002FTwitter within a configurable recent window (default 30 days). Forcing intake clarifies topic specificity, angle (trend\u002Fsentiment\u002Fproblems\u002Fopportunities\u002Fcomparison), 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.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fresearch\u002Fpulse\u002Fskills\u002Fpulse\u002FSKILL.md",[129,132],{"categoryNo":130,"categoryName":131,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000021","资料检索与研究",{"categoryNo":99,"categoryName":100,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},[125,134,135,108,136,18,111,137,138,112,21,139,140,141,23,117,142,118,27,28],"research","web","sentiment analysis","sentiment","Citations","discovery","open","tool","twitter",{"skillNo":144,"name":145,"nameZh":6,"description":146,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":147,"categories":148,"keywords":154,"publishedAt":29},"01M6C279M59X635VPD6Y9R616J","patent","Patent prior-art and landscape intelligence skill — not generic patent help. Commits to one of five sub-use-cases via forcing intake (novelty search \u002F freedom-to-operate \u002F competitive landscape \u002F acquisition diligence \u002F litigation prior-art) before any search runs. Searches Google Patents, Espacenet, USPTO, and optionally Lens.org for citation-graph signals. Output is an editable Word document (.docx) with verdict, ranked closest art (claim-text extracted), CPC-class-aware landscape, family-resolved hits, geographic coverage, FTO flags where applicable, strategy recommendations, and full audit log. Use when the user asks for patent searching or analysis (e.g., 'prior art search for [invention]', 'freedom to operate analysis for [product]'). Produces search signal, not legal advice — always recommends consulting a patent attorney before filing or licensing decisions. Trademark, copyright, and trade-secret questions are out of scope.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fresearch\u002Fpatent\u002Fskills\u002Fpatent\u002FSKILL.md",[149,150,151],{"categoryNo":94,"categoryName":95,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},{"categoryNo":99,"categoryName":100,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},{"categoryNo":152,"categoryName":153,"taxonomyType":104,"taxonomyTypeDesc":105},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000037","律师与法务",[145,107,108,155,156,157,18,110,111,21,158,159,160,117,161,162,163,164,28,165],"competitive landscape","routing","product","commits","Word","text","acquisition","decisions","strategy","coverage","advice",{"skillNo":167,"name":168,"nameZh":6,"description":169,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":170,"categories":171,"keywords":176,"publishedAt":29},"01M6C275RZWNRB3CCB14QQM7ES","notebooklm","Browser automation skill for controlling Google's NotebookLM. Use when the user wants anything done in NotebookLM (e.g., 'open NotebookLM', 'check my [name] notebook', 'ask my notebook about X', 'add [source] to NotebookLM', 'generate a Video Overview from my notebook', 'use NotebookLM Studio'). Handles reading and querying notebooks, adding sources (URLs, text, files, YouTube links, synthesized content), generating Studio outputs (Audio\u002FVideo Overviews, Mind Maps, Reports incl. Briefing Doc\u002FStudy Guide\u002FFAQ, Flashcards, Quiz, slide decks, infographics — discover the exact set from the live Studio panel; the UI evolves fast), and creating new notebooks. Requires browser automation environment — fails gracefully when unavailable.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fresearch\u002Fnotebooklm\u002Fskills\u002Fnotebooklm\u002FSKILL.md",[172,175],{"categoryNo":173,"categoryName":174,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000016","图像与多媒体",{"categoryNo":99,"categoryName":100,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},[168,177,178,134,179,180,181,182,183,184,185,186,140,160,23,25,187,188,189,28],"google","browser automation","automation","generate","browser","fast","SET","doc","Video","Audio","ask","environment","overview",{"skillNo":191,"name":192,"nameZh":6,"description":193,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":194,"categories":195,"keywords":200,"publishedAt":29},"01M6C2717B0QDJ3Y4PJP77BMW5","litreview","Academic literature orientation skill that searches papers via free keyless APIs (PubMed E-utilities + OpenAlex) by default — with the Consensus MCP as an optional enhancement lane when connected — builds a strategic search plan using PICO (default) or SPIDER \u002F Decomposition \u002F hybrid as fallbacks, and synthesizes findings into a formatted Word (.docx) research guide. Grill-me intake (research question specificity + framework hint + tentative depth) before the recon search; a second forcing checkpoint after Phase 2 confirms framework + sub-areas + depth before searches consume budget. Configurable depth (5\u002F10\u002F20 queries) controls coverage vs. speed. Output is a 'launching pad' — an orientation guide that lets a researcher dive in confidently, not a finished review. Use when the user starts literature-oriented research (e.g., 'litreview on [topic]', 'literature review on [topic]', 'I'm starting a literature review on X', 'I'm writing a paper on X', 'help me research X', 'I'm doing research on X', 'can you help me research X'). Do NOT use for single one-off paper searches wanting a quick list — that's a plain PubMed\u002FOpenAlex (or Consensus) query.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fresearch\u002Flitreview\u002Fskills\u002Flitreview\u002FSKILL.md",[196,197,198,199],{"categoryNo":94,"categoryName":95,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},{"categoryNo":130,"categoryName":131,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},{"categoryNo":99,"categoryName":100,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},{"categoryNo":102,"categoryName":103,"taxonomyType":104,"taxonomyTypeDesc":105},[192,107,201,202,203,108,18,110,204,205,206,113,207,159,208,117,119,209,164,28],"MCP","writing","review","lane","keyless","literature review","plan","researcher","question",{"skillNo":211,"name":212,"nameZh":6,"description":213,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":214,"categories":215,"keywords":220,"publishedAt":29},"01M6C26X5G3WDVWQ40Y16ZS19F","grants","NIH grant research skill for clinical researchers. Grill-me intake (research idea + career stage + preliminary data + environment + submission posture + known institute targets) locks down the funding strategy before any search runs. Runs a 5-facet Consensus positioning analysis (with draft Significance\u002FInnovation language), maps the research to the right NIH institutes and study sections via RePORTER, finds NOSIs and funded overlap, and produces an editable Word document (.docx) with budget\u002Fscope-aware mechanism recommendations, submission timelines, and a mandatory program officer recommendation. Use when the user asks about research funding or makes any grant-related request (e.g., 'grants for [topic]', 'find grants for my research idea', 'what grants match my research', 'help me find NIH funding', 'grant opportunities for my research'). NIH-only scope — non-NIH funders (PCORI, DOD CDMRP, VA, foundations) are out of scope and flagged at intake.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmne20114-hash\u002Fgest35bi\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fclaude-skills\u002Fresearch\u002Fgrants\u002Fskills\u002Fgrants\u002FSKILL.md",[216,217,218,219],{"categoryNo":94,"categoryName":95,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},{"categoryNo":130,"categoryName":131,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},{"categoryNo":99,"categoryName":100,"taxonomyType":96,"taxonomyTypeDesc":97},{"categoryNo":102,"categoryName":103,"taxonomyType":104,"taxonomyTypeDesc":105},[212,107,134,108,221,18,110,111,222,223,112,21,159,117,118,119,163,188,28,224],"help","data","Budget","innovation"]