Skill UI

A comprehensive 7-section report providing a deep assessment of a repository's health and readiness level. It calculates key metrics including risk score, agent topology recommendations, MCP surface area, test confidence, and publish readiness. This tool is vital for pre-mint reviews, detecting architectural drift, and enforcing strict CI/CD quality gates.

This skill generates an enterprise-grade threat model report for MCP surfaces. It categorizes security threats and outputs severity levels like clean, low, medium, or high. Suitable for pre-launch security reviews and periodic audits. It integrates with the harness binary and supports JSON or table formats.

This skill reviews prediction market, basket, oracle, and trading-agent workflows to ensure compliance, safety, data quality, and privacy. It must be run before any workflow handles user portfolio data, venue authentication, API keys, or trade planning to mitigate execution and regulatory risks across multiple domains.

This skill executes the final two phases of the SPARC methodology: Refinement and Completion. It systematically reviews the implemented feature through rigorous code reviews, expands test coverage (unit, integration, edge cases), validates performance, generates a traceability matrix, creates comprehensive documentation, and confirms deployment readiness. It ensures the feature is robust, tested, and production-ready.

This skill provides a comprehensive, read-only audit of a development workspace, including active repositories, installed plugins, connected services, and environment configurations. It analyzes existing capabilities against best practices to identify functional gaps and recommends the most valuable ECC-native skills, hooks, and workflows needed to enhance the development experience. Ideal for setup planning and architectural reviews.

This skill reviews a single Markdown troubleshooting note to assess its clarity and completeness. It is designed to identify unclear steps, missing prerequisites, or unverifiable claims within a provided note. Use it when a user asks for feedback to improve an existing troubleshooting document. It provides concise, actionable rewrite suggestions without making any external changes or edits.

Automates comprehensive code reviews for GitHub pull requests using parallel specialized agents. Performs eligibility checks, context gathering, multi-perspective analysis, and adversarial verification to ensure high-quality feedback. Only works on GitHub PRs, not local changes.

A comprehensive guide for authors preparing rebuttals following AAMAS preliminary reviews. It details the specific constraints (e.g., double-blind, no new results), the strategies for addressing diverse technical reviewers (such as game theorists, MARL experts, and systems engineers), and the structured pattern required to maximize the impact of a short response window.

This comprehensive preflight checklist is designed for authors submitting a commissioned review article to Annual Reviews of Psychology (ARPsych). It guides users through critical compliance checks, ensuring adherence to assigned length, proper reference formatting, securing figure permissions, completing conflict-of-interest disclosures, and verifying the transparency and reproducibility of any embedded meta-analysis or literature search. It serves as the final quality assurance step before formal publishing submission.

This guide teaches authors how to frame their research contribution for a high-impact, generalist journal like the British Journal of Political Science (BJPS). It emphasizes moving beyond niche literature reviews to engage with broad, live, cross-subfield, and cross-national debates. The goal is to satisfy both specialized experts and generalist editors by clearly defining the academic gap and positioning the study as a significant move in the field's debate.

This guide teaches advanced techniques for writing literature reviews in top-tier economics journals. The core principle is moving beyond simply listing past work; instead, you must precisely position your contribution by defining the delta (difference) relative to specific, foundational academic papers. Learn to articulate your unique value by highlighting improved identification strategies, clearer mechanisms, or novel parameters.

This guide provides rigorous standards for crafting academic literature reviews, particularly for specialized journals in economics. It instructs authors to move beyond simple citation listing and instead structure the review around identified research gaps. The required structure emphasizes a clear progression from 'Current Status' to 'Deficiencies' and finally to 'Novel Positioning,' ensuring the paper's marginal contribution is clearly derived from a knowledge gap.