The Socratic spec-refinement front of /feature, and the planning front of /sprint. Routed to BEFORE any code — it takes a one-line idea and drives it to an approved, concrete spec with testable acceptance criteria. Four gated phases — frame, refine, write, approve. No implementation and no handoff to tdd until the spec is on disk and approved; each acceptance criterion becomes one tdd Phase 1 obligation.
npx skills add https://github.com/arbiterForge/codeArbiter --skill brainstorming
Refine the idea before it touches code. Routed to by /feature (before tdd) and by /sprint (the planning front).
Read these, or STOP and surface the gap — never guess scope or stack:
{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/CONTEXT.md — the stage: frontmatter (the maturity value), domain vocabulary, and what the project is NOT building.{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/tech-stack.md — the stack the feature must fit; rule out incompatible designs early.{{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/open-questions.md — existing [CONFIRM-NN] items; new ones number sequentially from here.Per-feature and light. NOT decompose's whole-project six-layer interview — one feature, four phases.
Take the one-line idea and pin its boundaries before asking anything else:
CONTEXT.md: it never contradicts the NOT-building list or redefines domain vocabulary. A contradiction is a conflict — surface it, do not reconcile it silently.Gate: problem, caller, and out-of-scope boundary stated and consistent with CONTEXT.md.
One focused question at a time. Never advance on a hand-wavy answer. Run every answer through three lenses:
[CONFIRM-NN].tdd.Record every genuinely-unresolved unknown as [CONFIRM-NN] in {{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/open-questions.md, numbered sequentially. A finding that belongs to a different feature or a future scope gets an inline [NEEDS-TRIAGE] marker in the notes — never route it to a ticket.
Gate: every vague term made concrete; every forced trade-off resolved or recorded as [CONFIRM-NN]; no unresolved "later" outside a [CONFIRM-NN]. A blocking [CONFIRM-NN] that gates the spec's core stops the loop — surface it and STOP.
Write the agreed spec to {{PROJECT_DIR}}/.codearbiter/specs/<slug>.md. The slug is derived from the feature. The spec holds:
tdd Phase 1 obligations — one obligation per criterion, so an untestable criterion is a defect to fix here, not in tdd.[CONFIRM-NN] raised, cross-referenced to open-questions.md.Governs: <comma-separated globs> that enrolls the approved spec in file-scoped just-in-time context injection: on a Read of any file matching one of the listed globs, a pointer to this spec is surfaced to the agent (tier 3 of the file→knowledge map). Adding the line is sufficient to enroll; no other change required.Gate: the spec file exists on disk under specs/, with at least one acceptance criterion and every criterion individually testable.
The spec is approved before any code is written or any handoff to tdd occurs — no exceptions:
/feature — present the spec and request explicit user approval. Iterate on the file in place until the user approves. A blocking [CONFIRM-NN] must be resolved by the user before approval — never auto-resolve it./sprint — approval may be granted automatically by SMARTS scoring, logged to the .codearbiter/ audit trail. A blocking [CONFIRM-NN] is never auto-approvable; it escalates to the user and STOPs the sprint flow.On approval, hand off to the tdd skill, which enters Phase 1 against the approved spec — one obligation per acceptance criterion.
Gate: the spec is approved (by the user under /feature, or by logged SMARTS auto-approval under /sprint) with no unresolved blocking [CONFIRM-NN]. Only then does control pass to tdd.
tdd before the spec is on disk under specs/ AND approved.[CONFIRM-NN] by guessing — surface it and record it in open-questions.md.[CONFIRM-NN], even under /sprint — it escalates to the user.CONTEXT.md — a contradiction is a conflict to surface, not reconcile./sprint auto-approval to the .codearbiter/ audit trail.{{PLUGIN_ROOT}}/includes/harvest.md) over any [NEEDS-TRIAGE] notes raised this run — batch-confirm promoting them to open-tasks.md (work) or open-questions.md (decisions) so out-of-scope ideas don't vanish.Use this skill when implementing tasks according to Conductor's TDD workflow, handling phase checkpoints, managing git commits for tasks, or understanding the verification protocol.
Prepares and structurally reviews readiness evidence for ISO management-system and laboratory-competence standards - ISO 13485 medical device QMS, ISO 14971 device risk management, ISO/IEC 17025 testing and calibration laboratories, and ISO 15189 medical laboratories. Use when organizing declared scope, controlled documents, risk-management files, scope of accreditation, traceability, CAPA, external-provider controls, or bounded local evidence manifests, and when separating ISO certification from laboratory accreditation, FDA QMSR inspection, CLIA certification, MDSAP, and EU MDR/IVDR evidence boundaries. Not for legal applicability, compliance, certification, or accreditation decisions; contains no clause text.
Sample-size and statistical power calculations for planning studies. Use whenever someone asks "how many subjects/samples/replicates do I need", wants an a priori power analysis, a minimum detectable effect (MDE), a power curve, or needs to justify a sample size for a grant, IRB protocol, or pre-registration. Covers closed-form power for t-tests, ANOVA, proportions, correlations, chi-square, and regression, plus simulation-based (Monte Carlo) power for designs with no formula — logistic/Poisson regression, mixed models, cluster-randomized trials, survival, and interactions. Use this skill even when the request only mentions an effect size, alpha, or "80% power" without saying "power analysis" explicitly. For laying out the study (randomization, blocking, factorial/DOE, crossover, sequential designs) use experimental-design; for analyzing data already collected and reporting it use statistical-analysis.
Universal QA checklist for generated scientific plots: overlapping labels, clipped text, missing axes/legends, overcrowded data, and cross-journal resolution/format guidance.
Senior Elite Software Engineer (15+) and Senior Product Designer. Full workflow with planning, architecture, TDD, clean code, and pixel-perfect UX validation.
Run PinchBench benchmarks to evaluate OpenClaw agent performance across real-world tasks. Use when testing model capabilities, comparing models, submitting benchmark results to the leaderboard, or checking how well your OpenClaw setup handles calendar, email, research, coding, and multi-step workflows.
Use this skill when implementing tasks according to Conductor's TDD workflow, handling phase checkpoints, managing git commits for tasks, or understanding the verification protocol.
Verify PowerToys behavior end-to-end with the winapp CLI across two scenarios: (A) a module's release checklist against the installed build; (B) PR validation — derive each PR's checklist from its description + diff, then drive it against the installed build (a merged/shipped PR, or a whole release/hotfix set) or by building + sideloading the module when the PR isn't in the build yet (unmerged or not-yet-released). Drive each item via UIA invoke / Named Events / settings.json edits / clipboard / GPO / SendInput, and emit a structured PASS / FAIL / BLOCKED verdict per item with evidence (FAIL distinguishes product defects from stale/ambiguous checklist items). Use when asked to verify a module checklist, validate a PR, sign off a release/hotfix's PRs, or QA installed/sideloaded PowerToys bits. Combines generic winapp ui mechanics (references/winapp-ui-testing.md) with PT-specific recipes, per-scenario playbooks (references/scenarios/), and the helper .ps1 files shipped with this skill.
Take arbiterforge/brainstorming from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal
use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.
The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the
same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.