19 skills published by c-kick across 1 repository. Together they weigh 26 745 tokens — that is what loading all of them at once would cost you in context. 1 of them have been repackaged into other people's repositories.
19 skills 26 745 tokens total 1 copies elsewhere
Four-phase debugging methodology with root cause analysis. Use when investigating bugs, fixing test failures, or troubleshooting unexpected behavior. Emphasizes NO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE FIRST.
Browse and visually inspect webpages using an available browser automation tool, preferably headless Chromium via Puppeteer MCP. Use when you need to see a page, interact with a web UI, extract information that a plain fetch cannot get (JS-rendered content, SPAs, authenticated pages), or when the user wants to show you something in a browser.
> Proactive bug-hunting methodology — autonomous codebase reconnaissance to find latent bugs, hidden failure modes, and ticking time bombs BEFORE they detonate in production. Use this skill whenever the user asks to "find bugs", "hunt for issues", "audit this codebase", "what could go wrong", "find what's broken", "stress-test this project", "find landmines", "what will bite me later", or any variation of proactive defect discovery. Also trigger when the user says "scan for problems", "pre-flight check", "what am I missing across the codebase", "find the weak spots", or asks for a proactive quality sweep before a release, merge, or deployment. This is NOT for debugging known errors (use systematic-debugging) or reviewing specific code you're handed (use hostile-review). This is for when there are no known errors yet and you need to go FIND them.
Draft git commit messages. Use when asked to create, draft, or prepare a commit message. Analyzes staged/unstaged changes and recent history to match project style.
Draft a commit message strictly for the work done in THIS session, identifying exactly which files belong in the commit. Ignores pre-existing dirty files.
> Behavioral modifier that applies senior PM-level critical evaluation to user requests. Use when the user invokes /critical-mode, or asks for "critical mode", "pm mode", "challenge my assumptions", "push back on this", "be my devil's advocate", or wants the assistant to actively question whether a request is the right thing to do before executing. aggressive (maximum scrutiny). Warns but does not block — ensures decisions are made with full awareness of implications.
> Activates evidence-grounded behavioral constraints that minimize hallucination. Use this skill when the user invokes /factual-mode, or when they ask for "factual mode", "grounded mode", "no guessing", "only use what's in front of you", "don't hallucinate", "stick to the facts", "evidence-based only", or any variation requesting that the assistant restrict itself to verifiable claims. Also appropriate when the user is about to analyze documents, audit code, review contracts, or perform any task where accuracy matters more than creativity.
> Adversarial code/plan/design review by a senior dev who hates what you built. Use this skill whenever the user asks for a hostile, brutal, or adversarial review — phrases like "tear this apart", "what's wrong with this", "pretend you hate this", "roast my code", "devil's advocate", "worst-case critique", "what am I missing", "what would a critic say", or "stress-test this plan" should all trigger it. Also use proactively when the user seems too confident about a piece of code or a design decision and would benefit from someone pushing back hard. The output is severity-ranked criticisms with concrete fixes — not a PR checklist, but a genuine attempt to break the thing before reality does.
> Rewrites text to remove AI writing patterns and inject human voice. Use this skill whenever the user asks to "humanize", "de-AI", "make this sound human", "remove AI tells", "fix AI slop", "make it less ChatGPT-y", "rewrite this so it doesn't sound like a bot", or shares text and asks for it to sound more natural, more like them, or less like a press release. Also use proactively when the user is reviewing copy that will be public-facing (blog posts, marketing pages, social posts, emails, READMEs) and you can see obvious AI tells — em-dash overuse, "stands as a testament to", rule-of-three lists, sycophantic openers, generic "in conclusion" wrap-ups. The skill identifies specific patterns from Wikipedia's "Signs of AI writing" page and rewrites them while preserving meaning and tone.
Standards for internationalization and string handling. Apply when touching files with user-facing strings or preparing strings for translation.
JavaScript standards and patterns. Apply when writing or modifying JavaScript modules, event handling, lazy loading, scroll behavior, or browser-side utilities.
Enforces PHP documentation standards for PHPStorm IDE support. Apply when writing or reviewing PHP classes, methods, docblocks, type hints, or magic property annotations.
> The project's institutional memory and decision authority. Acts as an autonomous representative of the project — its goals, architecture, conventions, constraints, and intent. Use this skill whenever the active agent or another skill needs clarification about "ask the ambassador", "check with the ambassador", "what does the project want", "what's the project's stance on", or when any skill produces clarifying questions that the user redirects here. Also triggers when the user says "let the ambassador decide", "the ambassador knows", "don't ask me, ask the project", or similar delegation phrases. Use proactively when you're about to ask the user a question about project intent, conventions, or architecture — consult the ambassador first. If invoked without a prompt, performs a project knowledge audit.
Audit and improve code-agent project configuration. Use when the user wants to review or optimize AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, slash commands, settings, permissions, or tool approvals based on observed gaps or chat history patterns. Triggers on requests like "improve my agent instructions", "review my setup", "why does the assistant keep getting X wrong", or provider-specific variants such as "improve my Claude instructions". Do NOT use for general prompt engineering or code review.
> Diagnostic pause when an agent session has gone off-track. Use when the user says things like "wait, what are we doing", "we're lost", "this isn't what I asked for", "let's step back", "where are we", "sanity check this", or when you notice the session has drifted significantly from the original goal. Produces a SITREP (situation report), diagnoses what went wrong, assesses context window health, and proposes corrective actions or a fresh-start prompt if the context is too polluted to recover.
SCSS and CSS architecture standards. Apply when working with CSS, SCSS, styling architecture, component styles, tokens, or compiled stylesheet organization.
Query and apply The Website Specification — a platform-agnostic specification of what a good website does, with each item tagged required, recommended, optional, or avoid. Use when the user asks what their site should have, whether something is required, how to audit a URL, what's missing for agent readiness, or anything else where you'd otherwise be guessing at web best practice. Backs answers with primary sources (WHATWG, W3C, IETF RFCs, IANA, WCAG). Available as Markdown over HTTP and as an MCP server with search, list, fetch, checklist, and audit tools.
Senior Staff Engineer code review with SOLID principles, security analysis, and architecture critique. Use for significant changes, new systems, or when you want ruthless technical feedback.
> Simulate an objective first-time user review of a webpage or UI from the perspective of the target audience — no prior project context, no insider knowledge. Use this skill when the user asks things like "what would a user think of this page", "review this as a visitor", "give me a first-impression review", "pretend you're a patient/customer/prospect looking at this", "user test this page", or any variant of "look at this through fresh eyes". Also use proactively when the user shares a URL and seems to want qualitative UX or communication feedback rather than technical analysis. Requires the browser-eyeballs skill (Puppeteer MCP).