See your subjective experience as it truly is—without labels, judgments, or premature diagnoses.
Helps users turn rough prompts into clear, specific, reusable prompts in different LLMs through concise critique.
Hands-on prompt engineering and LLM evaluation. Built around a diagnose-then-ship loop: forensic transcript critique ▎ that names the exact failure mode, paired with a fixer that produces complete, deployment-ready rewrites — not ▎ vague advice.
This Skill is built around practical communication design, family-message tone control, AI guardrail writing, uncertainty labeling, and safe redirection for sensitive topics. It focuses on short parent-friendly wording, blame reduction, boundary-setting, fact-check reminders, and avoiding manipulative or overconfident replies.
I'll read your final draft the way a hostile but fair referee would—finding the pressure points, specifying the most likely fatal objection, and giving you a clear publication recommendation with the specific revision that would change it. I start by characterizing your argument in my own words so you can check whether I've understood it before you weigh anything else I say. Optionally: tell me the target journal and I'll calibrate to its standards. Not for your peer reviewing commitments.
Get a brutally honest critique before you publish. I actually watch your video and tell you the exact second viewers drop off, why the first 3 seconds are weak, and which shots or captions look amateur - section by section, with timestamps. No compliments, only what to fix and how to fix it. Works for Reels, Shorts, TikToks and ad videos.
Not every tradition treats the same wound: attention training is superb against rumination and useless against moral injury. REGULA identifies which of seven problems you're actually in, selects the tradition historically built for it, and writes you a Rule of Life: three daily anchors attached to moments already in your day, a weekly practice, a 30-day progression, a minimum that survives your worst week, and a printable card. No divine voice, no promises about outcomes.
Eine Frage, drei unabhängige KI-Antworten von Claude, Gemini und ChatGPT — plus eine strukturierte Debatte, bevor eine Empfehlung steht. Keine Einzelmeinung, sondern drei echte Perspektiven, die sich gegenseitig hinterfragen. Ideal, wenn eine Meinung einfach nicht reicht: bei der Wahl des Tech-Stacks, beim Stresstest einer Strategie, für ehrliches Feedback zu einem Text oder bei einer Entscheidung, die schon zu lange liegen bleibt.
New to Claude? Or not getting the answers you need? This Skill is made for Claude beginners. It does the thinking for you — three voices (Advocate, Skeptic, Judge) debate your question and deliver one clear, actionable answer. No experience required. Works in English and Japanese. 「Claudeって使いにくい」「答えが曖昧」と感じていませんか？このスキルは初心者向けです。3人の視点が自動で議論してくれるから、あなたは何もしなくても、Claudeからぐっと良い答えが返ってきます。初めての人こそ効果的。