From thinking-frameworks-skills
Extracts atomic technical claims from Substack essay drafts into a numbered list of verifiable statements with excerpts and locations. Skips non-technical sections like anecdotes and motivations. Use for technical reviews and fact-check prep.
npx claudepluginhub lyndonkl/claude --plugin thinking-frameworks-skillsThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
```
Generates design tokens/docs from CSS/Tailwind/styled-components codebases, audits visual consistency across 10 dimensions, detects AI slop in UI.
Records polished WebM UI demo videos of web apps using Playwright with cursor overlay, natural pacing, and three-phase scripting. Activates for demo, walkthrough, screen recording, or tutorial requests.
Delivers idiomatic Kotlin patterns for null safety, immutability, sealed classes, coroutines, Flows, extensions, DSL builders, and Gradle DSL. Use when writing, reviewing, refactoring, or designing Kotlin code.
Per draft:
- [ ] Step 1: Segment draft by heading / section
- [ ] Step 2: Within each section, split by sentence
- [ ] Step 3: Flag sentences containing technical claims:
- Math symbols / formulas
- Named systems, components, algorithms
- Quantitative assertions
- Universal quantifiers ("always", "never", "all models")
- Named papers / results
- [ ] Step 4: Coalesce adjacent claim sentences that argue the same thing into one claim
- [ ] Step 5: Output numbered list: {id, excerpt (≤200 chars), location}
Draft paragraph:
Attention is O(n²). This is why context windows are expensive. Each token looks at every other token, and the matrix is n-by-n.
Extraction:
[contrarian] annotations — still extract the claim, but flag it for classify-claim to treat specially.