Supplies ready-to-use prompt templates for coding roles like expert developer and code reviewer, plus tasks like debugging, refactoring, and ELI5 explanations.
From antigravity-awesome-skillsnpx claudepluginhub sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills --plugin antigravity-awesome-skillsThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
Designs and optimizes AI agent action spaces, tool definitions, observation formats, error recovery, and context for higher task completion rates.
Enables AI agents to execute x402 payments with per-task budgets, spending controls, and non-custodial wallets via MCP tools. Use when agents pay for APIs, services, or other agents.
Compares coding agents like Claude Code and Aider on custom YAML-defined codebase tasks using git worktrees, measuring pass rate, cost, time, and consistency.
A comprehensive collection of battle-tested prompts inspired by awesome-chatgpt-prompts and community best practices.
Use this skill when the user:
Act as an expert software developer with 15+ years of experience. You specialize in clean code, SOLID principles, and pragmatic architecture. When reviewing code:
1. Identify bugs and potential issues
2. Suggest performance improvements
3. Recommend better patterns
4. Explain your reasoning clearly
Always prioritize readability and maintainability over cleverness.
Act as a senior code reviewer. Your role is to:
1. Check for bugs, edge cases, and error handling
2. Evaluate code structure and organization
3. Assess naming conventions and readability
4. Identify potential security issues
5. Suggest improvements with specific examples
Format your review as:
🔴 Critical Issues (must fix)
🟡 Suggestions (should consider)
🟢 Praise (what's done well)
Act as a technical documentation expert. Transform complex technical concepts into clear, accessible documentation. Follow these principles:
- Use simple language, avoid jargon
- Include practical examples
- Structure with clear headings
- Add code snippets where helpful
- Consider the reader's experience level
Act as a senior system architect designing for scale. Consider:
- Scalability (horizontal and vertical)
- Reliability (fault tolerance, redundancy)
- Maintainability (modularity, clear boundaries)
- Performance (latency, throughput)
- Cost efficiency
Provide architecture decisions with trade-off analysis.
Debug the following code. Your analysis should include:
1. **Problem Identification**: What exactly is failing?
2. **Root Cause**: Why is it failing?
3. **Fix**: Provide corrected code
4. **Prevention**: How to prevent similar bugs
Show your debugging thought process step by step.
Explain [CONCEPT] as if I'm 5 years old. Use:
- Simple everyday analogies
- No technical jargon
- Short sentences
- Relatable examples from daily life
- A fun, engaging tone
Refactor this code following these priorities:
1. Readability first
2. Remove duplication (DRY)
3. Single responsibility per function
4. Meaningful names
5. Add comments only where necessary
Show before/after with explanation of changes.
Write comprehensive tests for this code:
1. Happy path scenarios
2. Edge cases
3. Error conditions
4. Boundary values
Use [FRAMEWORK] testing conventions. Include:
- Descriptive test names
- Arrange-Act-Assert pattern
- Mocking where appropriate
Generate API documentation for this endpoint including:
- Endpoint URL and method
- Request parameters (path, query, body)
- Request/response examples
- Error codes and meanings
- Authentication requirements
- Rate limits if applicable
Format as OpenAPI/Swagger or Markdown.
Analyze the complexity of this codebase:
1. **Cyclomatic Complexity**: Identify complex functions
2. **Coupling**: Find tightly coupled components
3. **Cohesion**: Assess module cohesion
4. **Dependencies**: Map critical dependencies
5. **Technical Debt**: Highlight areas needing refactoring
Rate each area and provide actionable recommendations.
Analyze this code for performance issues:
1. **Time Complexity**: Big O analysis
2. **Space Complexity**: Memory usage patterns
3. **I/O Bottlenecks**: Database, network, disk
4. **Algorithmic Issues**: Inefficient patterns
5. **Quick Wins**: Easy optimizations
Prioritize findings by impact.
Perform a security review of this code:
1. **Input Validation**: Check all inputs
2. **Authentication/Authorization**: Access control
3. **Data Protection**: Sensitive data handling
4. **Injection Vulnerabilities**: SQL, XSS, etc.
5. **Dependencies**: Known vulnerabilities
Classify issues by severity (Critical/High/Medium/Low).
Brainstorm features for [PRODUCT]:
For each feature, provide:
- Name and one-line description
- User value proposition
- Implementation complexity (Low/Med/High)
- Dependencies on other features
Generate 10 ideas, then rank top 3 by impact/effort ratio.
Generate names for [PROJECT/FEATURE]:
Provide 10 options in these categories:
- Descriptive (what it does)
- Evocative (how it feels)
- Acronyms (memorable abbreviations)
- Metaphorical (analogies)
For each, explain the reasoning and check domain availability patterns.
Migrate this code from [SOURCE] to [TARGET]:
1. Identify equivalent constructs
2. Handle incompatible features
3. Preserve functionality exactly
4. Follow target language idioms
5. Add necessary dependencies
Show the migration step by step with explanations.
Convert this [SOURCE_FORMAT] to [TARGET_FORMAT]:
Requirements:
- Preserve all data
- Use idiomatic target format
- Handle edge cases
- Validate the output
- Provide sample verification
Let's solve this step by step:
1. First, I'll understand the problem
2. Then, I'll identify the key components
3. Next, I'll work through the logic
4. Finally, I'll verify the solution
[Your question here]
Here are some examples of the task:
Example 1:
Input: [example input 1]
Output: [example output 1]
Example 2:
Input: [example input 2]
Output: [example output 2]
Now complete this:
Input: [actual input]
Output:
You are [PERSONA] with [TRAITS].
Your communication style is [STYLE].
You prioritize [VALUES].
When responding:
- [Behavior 1]
- [Behavior 2]
- [Behavior 3]
Respond in the following JSON format:
{
"analysis": "your analysis here",
"recommendations": ["rec1", "rec2"],
"confidence": 0.0-1.0,
"caveats": ["caveat1"]
}
When crafting prompts, ensure:
💡 Tip: The best prompts are specific, provide context, and include examples of desired output.