[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M71HM5R8377B81JSMP8XSYE7":3,"skill-same:01M71HM5R8377B81JSMP8XSYE7":67},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":16,"categories":17,"keywords":18,"publishedAt":39,"linkOnly":40,"markdownContent":41,"markdownBody":42,"frontMatter":43,"refName":44,"commitSha":45,"skillDirectory":46,"forksCount":47,"repositoryHtmlUrl":48,"repositoryHomepageUrl":49,"ownerHtmlUrl":50,"ownerBlogUrl":51,"ownerDescription":6,"updatedAt":52,"install":53,"resources":66},"01M71HM5R8377B81JSMP8XSYE7","model-domain",null,"Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md and specs\u002Fadr\u002F inline as decisions crystallise. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's domain language and documented decisions.","danielvm-git\u002Fbigpowers","danielvm-git","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F1020864?v=4","01M71H1N1CTQ529S0KN7KETVG6","Daniel V M","01M71H1N218Y3S8WHCJ58NPRSW",289,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdanielvm-git\u002Fbigpowers\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.codex\u002Fskills\u002Fmodel-domain\u002FSKILL.md",[],[19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38],"model domain","domain","model","Existing","use","session","tech","adr","as","sonnet","stress","domain language","inline","plan","stack","architecture","updates","when","stress-test","project","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nname: model-domain\nmodel: sonnet\ndescription: \"Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md and specs\u002Fadr\u002F inline as decisions crystallise. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's domain language and documented decisions.\"\n---\n\n# Model Domain\n\n**Distinct from `define-language` and `deepen-architecture`:** Use this skill to stress-test a plan through a grilling interview that resolves domain model decisions and captures invariants. Use `define-language` to produce a canonical glossary of terms. Use `deepen-architecture` to find module-level refactoring opportunities in code.\n\nInterview me relentlessly about every aspect of this plan until we reach a shared understanding. Walk down each branch of the design tree, resolving dependencies between decisions one-by-one. For each question, provide your recommended answer.\n\n> **HARD GATE** — Capture invariants (what MUST always be true) and state machines (what transitions are legal) for core entities. If these are fuzzy, design will fail.\n\nAsk the questions one at a time, waiting for feedback on each question before continuing.\n\nIf a question can be answered by exploring the codebase, explore the codebase instead.\n\n## Domain awareness\n\nDuring codebase exploration, also look for existing documentation:\n\n### File structure\n\nMost repos have a single context:\n\n```\n\u002F\n├── specs\u002F\n│   ├── CONTEXT.md\n│   └── adr\u002F\n│       ├── 0001-event-sourced-orders.md\n│       └── 0002-postgres-for-write-model.md\n└── src\u002F\n```\n\nIf a `specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md` exists, the repo has multiple contexts. The map points to where each one lives:\n\n```\n\u002F\n├── specs\u002F\n│   ├── CONTEXT-MAP.md\n│   └── adr\u002F                          ← system-wide decisions\n└── src\u002F\n    ├── ordering\u002F\n    │   └── specs\u002F\n    │       ├── CONTEXT.md\n    │       └── adr\u002F                  ← context-specific decisions\n    └── billing\u002F\n        └── specs\u002F\n            ├── CONTEXT.md\n            └── adr\u002F\n```\n\nCreate files lazily — only when you have something to write. If no `specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md` exists, create it when the first term is resolved. If no `specs\u002Fadr\u002F` exists, create it when the first ADR is needed.\n\n## During the session\n\n### Challenge against the glossary\n\nWhen the user uses a term that conflicts with the existing language in `specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md`, call it out immediately. \"Your glossary defines 'cancellation' as X, but you seem to mean Y — which is it?\"\n\n### Sharpen fuzzy language\n\nWhen the user uses vague or overloaded terms, propose a precise canonical term. \"You're saying 'account' — do you mean the Customer or the User? Those are different things.\"\n\n### Discuss concrete scenarios\n\nWhen domain relationships are being discussed, stress-test them with specific scenarios. Invent scenarios that probe edge cases and force the user to be precise about the boundaries between concepts.\n\n### Cross-reference with code\n\nWhen the user states how something works, check whether the code agrees. If you find a contradiction, surface it: \"Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible — which is right?\"\n\n### Update specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md inline\n\nWhen a term is resolved, update `specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md` right there. Don't batch these up — capture them as they happen. Use the format in [CONTEXT-FORMAT.md](.\u002FCONTEXT-FORMAT.md).\n\nDon't couple `specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md` to implementation details. Only include terms that are meaningful to domain experts.\n\n### Offer ADRs sparingly\n\nOnly offer to create an ADR when all three are true:\n\n1. **Hard to reverse** — the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful\n2. **Surprising without context** — a future reader will wonder \"why did they do it this way?\"\n3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons\n\nIf any of the three is missing, skip the ADR. Use the format in [ADR-FORMAT.md](.\u002FADR-FORMAT.md).\n\n## Concurrency safety audit\n\nWhen the plan touches shared state, async, or multi-threaded code:\n\n- [ ] List every **shared mutable** location (globals, singletons, module-level caches).\n- [ ] For each: who reads, who writes, synchronization mechanism (lock, actor, immutable copy).\n- [ ] Flag **race risks** (check-then-act, non-atomic read-modify-write) with severity.\n- [ ] Record findings in `specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md` under `## Concurrency` or in an ADR if architectural.\n\n\n\n\u003C!-- story: e07s03 -->\n\n---\n\n# ADR Format\n\nADRs live in `docs\u002Fadr\u002F` and use sequential numbering: `0001-slug.md`, `0002-slug.md`, etc.\n\nCreate the `docs\u002Fadr\u002F` directory lazily — only when the first ADR is needed.\n\n## Template\n\n```md\n# {Short title of the decision}\n\n{1-3 sentences: what's the context, what did we decide, and why.}\n```\n\nThat's it. An ADR can be a single paragraph. The value is in recording *that* a decision was made and *why* — not in filling out sections.\n\n## Optional sections\n\nOnly include these when they add genuine value. Most ADRs won't need them.\n\n- **Status** frontmatter (`proposed | accepted | deprecated | superseded by ADR-NNNN`) — useful when decisions are revisited\n- **Considered Options** — only when the rejected alternatives are worth remembering\n- **Consequences** — only when non-obvious downstream effects need to be called out\n\n## Numbering\n\nScan `docs\u002Fadr\u002F` for the highest existing number and increment by one.\n\n## When to offer an ADR\n\nAll three of these must be true:\n\n1. **Hard to reverse** — the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful\n2. **Surprising without context** — a future reader will look at the code and wonder \"why on earth did they do it this way?\"\n3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons\n\nIf a decision is easy to reverse, skip it — you'll just reverse it. If it's not surprising, nobody will wonder why. If there was no real alternative, there's nothing to record beyond \"we did the obvious thing.\"\n\n### What qualifies\n\n- **Architectural shape.** \"We're using a monorepo.\" \"The write model is event-sourced, the read model is projected into Postgres.\"\n- **Integration patterns between contexts.** \"Ordering and Billing communicate via domain events, not synchronous HTTP.\"\n- **Technology choices that carry lock-in.** Database, message bus, auth provider, deployment target. Not every library — just the ones that would take a quarter to swap out.\n- **Boundary and scope decisions.** \"Customer data is owned by the Customer context; other contexts reference it by ID only.\" The explicit no-s are as valuable as the yes-s.\n- **Deliberate deviations from the obvious path.** \"We're using manual SQL instead of an ORM because X.\" Anything where a reasonable reader would assume the opposite. These stop the next engineer from \"fixing\" something that was deliberate.\n- **Constraints not visible in the code.** \"We can't use AWS because of compliance requirements.\" \"Response times must be under 200ms because of the partner API contract.\"\n- **Rejected alternatives when the rejection is non-obvious.** If you considered GraphQL and picked REST for subtle reasons, record it — otherwise someone will suggest GraphQL again in six months.\n\n---\n\n# CONTEXT.md Format\n\n## Structure\n\n```md\n# {Context Name}\n\n{One or two sentence description of what this context is and why it exists.}\n\n## Language\n\n**Order**:\nA customer's request to purchase one or more items.\n_Avoid_: Purchase, transaction\n\n**Invoice**:\nA request for payment sent to a customer after delivery.\n_Avoid_: Bill, payment request\n\n**Customer**:\nA person or organization that places orders.\n_Avoid_: Client, buyer, account\n\n## Relationships\n\n- An **Order** produces one or more **Invoices**\n- An **Invoice** belongs to exactly one **Customer**\n\n## Example dialogue\n\n> **Dev:** \"When a **Customer** places an **Order**, do we create the **Invoice** immediately?\"\n> **Domain expert:** \"No — an **Invoice** is only generated once a **Fulfillment** is confirmed.\"\n\n## Flagged ambiguities\n\n- \"account\" was used to mean both **Customer** and **User** — resolved: these are distinct concepts.\n```\n\n## Rules\n\n- **Be opinionated.** When multiple words exist for the same concept, pick the best one and list the others as aliases to avoid.\n- **Flag conflicts explicitly.** If a term is used ambiguously, call it out in \"Flagged ambiguities\" with a clear resolution.\n- **Keep definitions tight.** One sentence max. Define what it IS, not what it does.\n- **Show relationships.** Use bold term names and express cardinality where obvious.\n- **Only include terms specific to this project's context.** General programming concepts (timeouts, error types, utility patterns) don't belong even if the project uses them extensively. Before adding a term, ask: is this a concept unique to this context, or a general programming concept? Only the former belongs.\n- **Group terms under subheadings** when natural clusters emerge. If all terms belong to a single cohesive area, a flat list is fine.\n- **Write an example dialogue.** A conversation between a dev and a domain expert that demonstrates how the terms interact naturally and clarifies boundaries between related concepts.\n\n## Single vs multi-context repos\n\n**Single context (most repos):** One `CONTEXT.md` at the repo root.\n\n**Multiple contexts:** A `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the repo root lists the contexts, where they live, and how they relate to each other:\n\n```md\n# Context Map\n\n## Contexts\n\n- Ordering — `src\u002Fordering\u002FCONTEXT.md` — receives and tracks customer orders\n- Billing — `src\u002Fbilling\u002FCONTEXT.md` — generates invoices and processes payments\n- Fulfillment — `src\u002Ffulfillment\u002FCONTEXT.md` — manages warehouse picking and shipping\n\n## Relationships\n\n- **Ordering → Fulfillment**: Ordering emits `OrderPlaced` events; Fulfillment consumes them to start picking\n- **Fulfillment → Billing**: Fulfillment emits `ShipmentDispatched` events; Billing consumes them to generate invoices\n- **Ordering ↔ Billing**: Shared types for `CustomerId` and `Money`\n```\n\nThe skill infers which structure applies:\n\n- If `CONTEXT-MAP.md` exists, read it to find contexts\n- If only a root `CONTEXT.md` exists, single context\n- If neither exists, create a root `CONTEXT.md` lazily when the first term is resolved\n\nWhen multiple contexts exist, infer which one the current topic relates to. If unclear, ask.\n","# Model Domain\n\n**Distinct from `define-language` and `deepen-architecture`:** Use this skill to stress-test a plan through a grilling interview that resolves domain model decisions and captures invariants. Use `define-language` to produce a canonical glossary of terms. Use `deepen-architecture` to find module-level refactoring opportunities in code.\n\nInterview me relentlessly about every aspect of this plan until we reach a shared understanding. Walk down each branch of the design tree, resolving dependencies between decisions one-by-one. For each question, provide your recommended answer.\n\n> **HARD GATE** — Capture invariants (what MUST always be true) and state machines (what transitions are legal) for core entities. If these are fuzzy, design will fail.\n\nAsk the questions one at a time, waiting for feedback on each question before continuing.\n\nIf a question can be answered by exploring the codebase, explore the codebase instead.\n\n## Domain awareness\n\nDuring codebase exploration, also look for existing documentation:\n\n### File structure\n\nMost repos have a single context:\n\n```\n\u002F\n├── specs\u002F\n│   ├── CONTEXT.md\n│   └── adr\u002F\n│       ├── 0001-event-sourced-orders.md\n│       └── 0002-postgres-for-write-model.md\n└── src\u002F\n```\n\nIf a `specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md` exists, the repo has multiple contexts. The map points to where each one lives:\n\n```\n\u002F\n├── specs\u002F\n│   ├── CONTEXT-MAP.md\n│   └── adr\u002F                          ← system-wide decisions\n└── src\u002F\n    ├── ordering\u002F\n    │   └── specs\u002F\n    │       ├── CONTEXT.md\n    │       └── adr\u002F                  ← context-specific decisions\n    └── billing\u002F\n        └── specs\u002F\n            ├── CONTEXT.md\n            └── adr\u002F\n```\n\nCreate files lazily — only when you have something to write. If no `specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md` exists, create it when the first term is resolved. If no `specs\u002Fadr\u002F` exists, create it when the first ADR is needed.\n\n## During the session\n\n### Challenge against the glossary\n\nWhen the user uses a term that conflicts with the existing language in `specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md`, call it out immediately. \"Your glossary defines 'cancellation' as X, but you seem to mean Y — which is it?\"\n\n### Sharpen fuzzy language\n\nWhen the user uses vague or overloaded terms, propose a precise canonical term. \"You're saying 'account' — do you mean the Customer or the User? Those are different things.\"\n\n### Discuss concrete scenarios\n\nWhen domain relationships are being discussed, stress-test them with specific scenarios. Invent scenarios that probe edge cases and force the user to be precise about the boundaries between concepts.\n\n### Cross-reference with code\n\nWhen the user states how something works, check whether the code agrees. If you find a contradiction, surface it: \"Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible — which is right?\"\n\n### Update specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md inline\n\nWhen a term is resolved, update `specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md` right there. Don't batch these up — capture them as they happen. Use the format in [CONTEXT-FORMAT.md](.\u002FCONTEXT-FORMAT.md).\n\nDon't couple `specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md` to implementation details. Only include terms that are meaningful to domain experts.\n\n### Offer ADRs sparingly\n\nOnly offer to create an ADR when all three are true:\n\n1. **Hard to reverse** — the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful\n2. **Surprising without context** — a future reader will wonder \"why did they do it this way?\"\n3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons\n\nIf any of the three is missing, skip the ADR. Use the format in [ADR-FORMAT.md](.\u002FADR-FORMAT.md).\n\n## Concurrency safety audit\n\nWhen the plan touches shared state, async, or multi-threaded code:\n\n- [ ] List every **shared mutable** location (globals, singletons, module-level caches).\n- [ ] For each: who reads, who writes, synchronization mechanism (lock, actor, immutable copy).\n- [ ] Flag **race risks** (check-then-act, non-atomic read-modify-write) with severity.\n- [ ] Record findings in `specs\u002Ftech-architecture\u002Ftech-stack.md` under `## Concurrency` or in an ADR if architectural.\n\n\n\n\u003C!-- story: e07s03 -->\n\n---\n\n# ADR Format\n\nADRs live in `docs\u002Fadr\u002F` and use sequential numbering: `0001-slug.md`, `0002-slug.md`, etc.\n\nCreate the `docs\u002Fadr\u002F` directory lazily — only when the first ADR is needed.\n\n## Template\n\n```md\n# {Short title of the decision}\n\n{1-3 sentences: what's the context, what did we decide, and why.}\n```\n\nThat's it. An ADR can be a single paragraph. The value is in recording *that* a decision was made and *why* — not in filling out sections.\n\n## Optional sections\n\nOnly include these when they add genuine value. Most ADRs won't need them.\n\n- **Status** frontmatter (`proposed | accepted | deprecated | superseded by ADR-NNNN`) — useful when decisions are revisited\n- **Considered Options** — only when the rejected alternatives are worth remembering\n- **Consequences** — only when non-obvious downstream effects need to be called out\n\n## Numbering\n\nScan `docs\u002Fadr\u002F` for the highest existing number and increment by one.\n\n## When to offer an ADR\n\nAll three of these must be true:\n\n1. **Hard to reverse** — the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful\n2. **Surprising without context** — a future reader will look at the code and wonder \"why on earth did they do it this way?\"\n3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons\n\nIf a decision is easy to reverse, skip it — you'll just reverse it. If it's not surprising, nobody will wonder why. If there was no real alternative, there's nothing to record beyond \"we did the obvious thing.\"\n\n### What qualifies\n\n- **Architectural shape.** \"We're using a monorepo.\" \"The write model is event-sourced, the read model is projected into Postgres.\"\n- **Integration patterns between contexts.** \"Ordering and Billing communicate via domain events, not synchronous HTTP.\"\n- **Technology choices that carry lock-in.** Database, message bus, auth provider, deployment target. Not every library — just the ones that would take a quarter to swap out.\n- **Boundary and scope decisions.** \"Customer data is owned by the Customer context; other contexts reference it by ID only.\" The explicit no-s are as valuable as the yes-s.\n- **Deliberate deviations from the obvious path.** \"We're using manual SQL instead of an ORM because X.\" Anything where a reasonable reader would assume the opposite. These stop the next engineer from \"fixing\" something that was deliberate.\n- **Constraints not visible in the code.** \"We can't use AWS because of compliance requirements.\" \"Response times must be under 200ms because of the partner API contract.\"\n- **Rejected alternatives when the rejection is non-obvious.** If you considered GraphQL and picked REST for subtle reasons, record it — otherwise someone will suggest GraphQL again in six months.\n\n---\n\n# CONTEXT.md Format\n\n## Structure\n\n```md\n# {Context Name}\n\n{One or two sentence description of what this context is and why it exists.}\n\n## Language\n\n**Order**:\nA customer's request to purchase one or more items.\n_Avoid_: Purchase, transaction\n\n**Invoice**:\nA request for payment sent to a customer after delivery.\n_Avoid_: Bill, payment request\n\n**Customer**:\nA person or organization that places orders.\n_Avoid_: Client, buyer, account\n\n## Relationships\n\n- An **Order** produces one or more **Invoices**\n- An **Invoice** belongs to exactly one **Customer**\n\n## Example dialogue\n\n> **Dev:** \"When a **Customer** places an **Order**, do we create the **Invoice** immediately?\"\n> **Domain expert:** \"No — an **Invoice** is only generated once a **Fulfillment** is confirmed.\"\n\n## Flagged ambiguities\n\n- \"account\" was used to mean both **Customer** and **User** — resolved: these are distinct concepts.\n```\n\n## Rules\n\n- **Be opinionated.** When multiple words exist for the same concept, pick the best one and list the others as aliases to avoid.\n- **Flag conflicts explicitly.** If a term is used ambiguously, call it out in \"Flagged ambiguities\" with a clear resolution.\n- **Keep definitions tight.** One sentence max. Define what it IS, not what it does.\n- **Show relationships.** Use bold term names and express cardinality where obvious.\n- **Only include terms specific to this project's context.** General programming concepts (timeouts, error types, utility patterns) don't belong even if the project uses them extensively. Before adding a term, ask: is this a concept unique to this context, or a general programming concept? Only the former belongs.\n- **Group terms under subheadings** when natural clusters emerge. If all terms belong to a single cohesive area, a flat list is fine.\n- **Write an example dialogue.** A conversation between a dev and a domain expert that demonstrates how the terms interact naturally and clarifies boundaries between related concepts.\n\n## Single vs multi-context repos\n\n**Single context (most repos):** One `CONTEXT.md` at the repo root.\n\n**Multiple contexts:** A `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the repo root lists the contexts, where they live, and how they relate to each other:\n\n```md\n# Context Map\n\n## Contexts\n\n- Ordering — `src\u002Fordering\u002FCONTEXT.md` — receives and tracks customer orders\n- Billing — `src\u002Fbilling\u002FCONTEXT.md` — generates invoices and processes payments\n- Fulfillment — `src\u002Ffulfillment\u002FCONTEXT.md` — manages warehouse picking and shipping\n\n## Relationships\n\n- **Ordering → Fulfillment**: Ordering emits `OrderPlaced` events; Fulfillment consumes them to start picking\n- **Fulfillment → Billing**: Fulfillment emits `ShipmentDispatched` events; Billing consumes them to generate invoices\n- **Ordering ↔ Billing**: Shared types for `CustomerId` and `Money`\n```\n\nThe skill infers which structure applies:\n\n- If `CONTEXT-MAP.md` exists, read it to find contexts\n- If only a root `CONTEXT.md` exists, single context\n- If neither exists, create a root `CONTEXT.md` lazily when the first term is resolved\n\nWhen multiple contexts exist, infer which one the current topic relates to. If unclear, ask.\n",{"name":5,"model":28,"description":7},"main","72f5e4c8b43f60cf86b37078ad8cd7e22daf67aa",".codex\u002Fskills\u002Fmodel-domain",24,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdanielvm-git\u002Fbigpowers","https:\u002F\u002Fdanielvm-git.github.io\u002Fbigpowers\u002F","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdanielvm-git","danielvm.net","2026-11-10 01:18:54",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":54,"prompt":64,"zipAvailable":65},[55,58,61],{"tool":56,"command":57},"npx","npx skills add danielvm-git\u002Fbigpowers --skill model-domain",{"tool":59,"command":60},"bunx","bunx skills add danielvm-git\u002Fbigpowers --skill model-domain",{"tool":62,"command":63},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add danielvm-git\u002Fbigpowers --skill model-domain","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdanielvm-git\u002Fbigpowers\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.codex\u002Fskills\u002Fmodel-domain\u002FSKILL.md",true,[],[68,89,96,123,144,165],{"skillNo":69,"name":70,"nameZh":6,"description":71,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":72,"categories":73,"keywords":79,"publishedAt":39},"01M71KBG9F8X644MJB16H4V8M7","skill-verify-fail-open-fixture","Negative-path fixture for run-skill-verify.sh — must never PASS.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdanielvm-git\u002Fbigpowers\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fspecs\u002Fverifications\u002Ffixtures\u002Fskill-verify-fail-open\u002FSKILL.md",[74],{"categoryNo":75,"categoryName":76,"taxonomyType":77,"taxonomyTypeDesc":78},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000023","Skill与智能体开发","SCENARIO","使用场景",[80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88],"fixture","open","verify","skill verify fail open fixture","skill verify","path","run","for","never",{"skillNo":90,"name":91,"nameZh":6,"description":6,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":92,"categories":93,"keywords":94,"publishedAt":39},"01M71KBE3BKEMKNE0C5DGVDWZH","negative-path","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdanielvm-git\u002Fbigpowers\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fspecs\u002Fverifications\u002Ffixtures\u002Fnegative-path\u002FSKILL.md",[],[95,85],"negative path",{"skillNo":97,"name":98,"nameZh":6,"description":99,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":100,"categories":101,"keywords":105,"publishedAt":39},"01M71KBBGF7Y4EB4AMHBZ8CJFC","write-document","Write, organize, and sync high-integrity technical documents using the BMAD methodology. Ensures every document is Bold, Minimal, Actionable, and Durable. Use when creating architectural docs, technical guides, or organizing the specs\u002F directory.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdanielvm-git\u002Fbigpowers\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fwrite-document\u002FSKILL.md",[102],{"categoryNo":103,"categoryName":104,"taxonomyType":77,"taxonomyTypeDesc":78},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000002","文档处理",[106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,23,36,116,117,28,118,119,120,121,122],"write","write document","document","documents","actionable","technical","methodology","high","bmad","standard","minimal","bold","integrity","organize","sync","directory","guides",{"skillNo":124,"name":125,"nameZh":6,"description":126,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":127,"categories":128,"keywords":129,"publishedAt":39},"01M71KB8TM089JJD5AY5KAFSDM","wire-observability","Add structured JSON logging, observability commands, and idempotent setup scripts to a project. Use when a project needs production-readiness instrumentation, when user wants structured logging, or as a production-readiness gate at any phase of development.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdanielvm-git\u002Fbigpowers\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fwire-observability\u002FSKILL.md",[],[130,131,132,115,133,23,134,27,135,136,28,137,138,139,140,141,142,36,38,143],"observability","wire observability","readiness","commands","development","logging","add","instrumentation","at","structured logging","production-readiness","idempotent","phase","scripts",{"skillNo":145,"name":146,"nameZh":6,"description":147,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":148,"categories":149,"keywords":150,"publishedAt":39},"01M71KB6CNRANP449DQA3NJZ96","wire-ci","CI pipeline setup with bundled, forge-neutral templates and local validation. Detects the forge from the git remote, generates workflows for supported forges, and skips honestly for the rest. The CI equivalent of wire-observability.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdanielvm-git\u002Fbigpowers\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fwire-ci\u002FSKILL.md",[],[151,152,153,154,155,156,157,158,159,160,161,115,162,87,130,28,163,164],"wire ci","ci","remote","local","pipeline","forge","validation","setup","templates","REST","with","ci pipeline setup","git","workflows",{"skillNo":166,"name":167,"nameZh":6,"description":168,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":169,"categories":170,"keywords":182,"publishedAt":39},"01M71KB2ZV98P03X88QR8MT9F1","visual-dashboard","Start a browser-based dashboard that visualizes architecture, implementation plans, and project status. Persists artifacts in .bigpowers\u002Fdashboard\u002F. Reads specs\u002Fstate.yaml, release-plan.yaml, epics, and planning-status via HTTP API or opencode panel.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdanielvm-git\u002Fbigpowers\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fvisual-dashboard\u002FSKILL.md",[171,174,179],{"categoryNo":172,"categoryName":173,"taxonomyType":77,"taxonomyTypeDesc":78},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000013","分析与可视化",{"categoryNo":175,"categoryName":176,"taxonomyType":177,"taxonomyTypeDesc":178},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000030","开发工程师","PROFESSION","适用职业",{"categoryNo":180,"categoryName":181,"taxonomyType":177,"taxonomyTypeDesc":178},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000033","数据分析师",[183,184,185,186,187,188,189,190,191,28,192,193,194,32,195,196,34,38,197,198],"dashboard","visual","visual dashboard","status","artifacts","http","plans","planning","panel","start","release","opencode","browser","api","project status","http api"]