Skill-uri pentru agenți pe care le poți verifica înainte să le instalezi
Skill-uri SKILL.md publice din depozite GitHub cu peste 50 de stele și de la producători, scanate și evaluate. Instalează oricare dintre ele cu o singură comandă în Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, GitHub Copilot sau Gemini CLI.
49.492 de skill-uri din 2.391 de depozite · actualizat acum 7 ore
49.492 de skill-uri
- aamas-submissionbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when auditing an AAMAS main-track submission for OpenReview readiness, the 8-page-plus-references limit, the full-paper versus 2-page extended-abstract choice, double-blind anonymity, the supplementary zip cap, track fit across the AAAI/JAAMAS/Blue Sky tracks, dual-submission rules, and desk-reject triggers before upload.ȘtiințăFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- cell-star-methodsbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse to build Cell's mandatory STAR Methods — the Key Resources Table, the three Resource Availability subsections, Experimental Model and Subject Details, Method Details, and Quantification and Statistical Analysis, in the exact required order.AlteleFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- generate-release-noteshuytieu/COG-second-brainGenerate categorized release notes from any source (GitHub, Linear, Jira, or manual input) with optional publishingProductivitateFără avertismente★ 1,3 K↓ —
- asplos-workflowbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when planning an ASPLOS campaign across the two-deadline cycle — sequencing evidence building, the September 9, 2026 submission gate, author-response windows, the December 21 notification, Major Revision resubmission six weeks later, artifact evaluation, and the April 2027 conference in Crete, with owners per risk.ProductivitateFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- atc-review-processbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when reasoning about how an ATC (ACM SIGOPS Annual Technical Conference, formerly USENIX ATC) submission is evaluated — the two-round extended-abstract model, the round-one gate by two reviewers, the round-two read by 3-4 reviewers, double-blind reviewing, rebuttal, conditional acceptance with shepherding, and how ATC differs from OSDI/SOSP/NSDI.InginerieFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- cav-review-processbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when reasoning about how a CAV (Computer Aided Verification) submission is evaluated, covering the two-stage reviewing process (two reviews then an early-reject filter, then two more reviews with a rebuttal), the partial double-anonymity by category, the accept/reject outcome, the optional non-conditional artifact evaluation, and how CAV differs from TACAS and FMCAD.InginerieFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- vis-writing-stylebrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when revising an IEEE VIS paper for a task-grounded visualization contribution on the first page, a design rationale that ties each visual encoding and interaction to a task, evaluation matched to the contribution type, honest limitations, and disciplined use of the VGTC/TVCG 9+2 page budget for a paper that will be read as an IEEE TVCG journal article.RedactareFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- vldb-experimentsbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when designing or auditing the evaluation of a VLDB paper, covering workload and dataset realism at scale, competitor tuning fairness, scalability curves versus single points, tail-latency and throughput reporting, ablations that isolate the mechanism, and the loss-case disclosure PVLDB reviewers look for first.ȘtiințăFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- wacv-experimentsbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when designing or auditing WACV experiments, covering Applications-track systems evidence (latency, power, robustness under real constraints) versus Algorithms-track matched-baseline novelty, comparative assessment under the deployed condition, uncertainty over seeds and sessions, ablations, and evidence that survives the two-round review.DevOpsFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- aaai-related-workbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when positioning an AAAI paper's novelty against archival work, contemporaneous arXiv or workshop papers, and AAAI/IJCAI/NeurIPS/ICML/ICLR neighbors across the broad AI scope, while staying inside AAAI's dual-submission and AI-as-source policy constraints and writing a related-work section legible to non-specialist reviewers.ȘtiințăFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- wsdm-experimentsbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when designing or auditing the evaluation of a WSDM paper - offline ranking and recommendation metrics with bias controls, temporal-split protocols for interaction logs, baseline selection from recent WSDM/SIGIR/KDD editions, ablations that isolate the mechanism, efficiency reporting, and online-evidence framing.ȘtiințăFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- sosp-experimentsbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when designing or auditing the evaluation of a SOSP paper — mapping every claim to an experiment, choosing baselines a systems PC will accept as fair, mixing microbenchmarks with end-to-end and failure runs, reporting tails and overheads honestly, and isolating the mechanism the design credits.DesignFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- vis-supplementarybrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when deciding what belongs in an IEEE VIS paper body versus its supplemental materials, covering the VGTC/TVCG 9+2 page budget, the supplemental video that VIS reviewers routinely watch, the one-week supplemental deadline extension, double-blind supplemental anonymization, and how to split a visualization paper between the reviewed pages and the archive.MediaFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- socc-experimentsbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when designing or auditing ACM SoCC evaluations, covering real or realistic deployments over simulation, production or representative workloads and traces, tail-latency and cost as first-class metrics, fair tuned baselines, scale and multi-tenancy behavior, reproducible measurement pipelines, and matching evidence to the shape of each cloud claim.DevOpsFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- stoc-experimentsbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when judging whether computation belongs in a STOC (ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing) paper at all — STOC accepts on theorems, with no empirical-evaluation expectation — and when it does, scoping it as certified proof computation, constructive search, or clearly labeled illustration rather than benchmarking.MediaFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- pods-experimentsbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when designing or auditing the analytical "evidence" of an ACM PODS paper — worst-case and average-case analyses, matching upper and lower bounds, dichotomy completeness, correct complexity assumptions, and the occasional empirical validation when a theory paper claims practicality — matching the rigor to the shape of each theoretical claim.ȘtiințăFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- pldi-experimentsbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when designing or auditing a PLDI evaluation — choosing defensible benchmark suites and baseline compiler configurations, measuring runtime, compile time, and memory with warmup and variance discipline, running ablations that isolate the claimed mechanism, and scoping claims to the platforms measured.ProductivitateFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- clean-user-facing-textguillaumemeyer/watermarks-removerClean and finalize authorized natural-language text intended for readers by auditing suspicious invisible Unicode and rewriting prose while preserving facts, meaning, and the writer's voice. Use when the user asks to clean, humanize, polish, or finalize articles, manuscripts, reports, documentation, emails, product copy, UI text, Markdown, or HTML prose, or when a project rule or instruction file explicitly requires this workflow. Don't use for code-only tasks or undisclosed authorship evasion; leave code, commands, identifiers, paths, APIs, formulas, citations, required disclosures, and verbatim quotations unchanged.DesignFără avertismente★ 26,2 K↓ —
- rss-supplementarybrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsJournal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. | 覆盖主流期刊的 Claude Code/Codex 期刊技能包,从选题、识别策略到表格规范与审稿回复全流程,助你快速发论文。PlanificareFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- kdd-writing-stylebrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when revising a KDD paper into the venue's register, where the first page names a data regime, a mechanism, and scale evidence, efficiency adjectives trace to design decisions, and two-column sigconf pages punish sprawl. Covers Research vs ADS voice, dataset-size discipline, assertive contribution bullets, and 8-page compression.RedactareFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- ipsn-experimentsbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when designing or auditing IPSN-lineage evaluations, covering real testbeds and deployments, ground-truth instrumentation, energy/latency/footprint measurement on real hardware, on-device/TinyML profiling, estimation-theoretic baselines and bounds, and matching evidence to the shape of each sensing claim across the IP and SPOTS tracks.DevOpsFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- lancet-writingbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse to structure and hold the length of a Lancet Article main text — Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion (~3000–3500 words), the Research in context panel, a limited reference list (~30), and a cautious, globally minded Discussion that does not overstate.RedactareFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
- multi-domain-brand-seokostja94/marketing-skillsWhen the user wants to optimize brand search for a company with multiple domains (e.g. parent company.com vs product.ai). Ensure the parent/company domain ranks first for brand queries. Also use when the user mentions "brand search," "multi-domain SEO," "company domain first," "parent vs product domain," "hub-spoke domain," "brand SERP control," or "differentiate company and product domains." For domain structure, use domain-architecture.MarketingFără avertismente★ 1,1 K↓ —
- imc-writing-stylebrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsUse when drafting or revising the prose of an ACM IMC measurement paper, covering the first-page measurement finding, making vantage points and methodology auditable, longitudinal framing for a moving Internet, arguing limitations rather than reciting them, writing the Ethics section early, and acmart page-budget discipline.RedactareFără avertismente★ 1,4 K↓ —
competitor-experience-audit
rampstackco/claude-skills
De la autor
Audit the brand, UX, and site design of the leading sites in a vertical as a set of observable cross-site patterns, producing the experience bar a new build must meet or beat. Use this skill whenever the user wants to assess the competitive design field, capture vertical conventions, identify the design and UX bar of a category, or set the experience standard before a build. Triggers on competitor experience audit, UX audit, site design audit, brand audit, design conventions, what makes these sites good, vertical conventions, storefront patterns, merchandising patterns, layout density, primary task, design bar, category conventions, retail vs marketing register, what does the field do. Also triggers when an audit of the competitive field has captured technical signals (SEO, accessibility) but never named the brand, UX, or design conventions, and the build downstream will read as off-vertical without that bar.
Instalare
npx skills add rampstackco/claude-skills --skill competitor-experience-audit -a claude-code
Se instalează în .claude/skills/competitor-experience-audit/ · Fiecare comandă descarcă skill-ul direct de pe GitHub cu utilitarul open source skills.
Identic octet cu octet cu commit-ul scanat, cu licența depozitului și un fișier SOURCE.txt.
La ce are acces
Verificări de siguranță pe SKILL.md
Niciun avertisment.
De ce 88
Fișiere (4)
- README.md
- SKILL.md
- references/audit-template.md
- references/experience-dimensions-checklist.md