skills/dnyoussef/micro-skill-creator/SKILL.md
Rapidly creates atomic, focused skills optimized with evidence-based prompting, specialist agents, and systematic testing. Each micro-skill does one thing exceptionally well using self-consistency, program-of-thought, and plan-and-solve patterns. Enhanced with agent-creator principles and functionality-audit validation. Perfect for building composable workflow components.
npx skillsauth add aiskillstore/marketplace micro-skill-creatorInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Creates small, focused skills that each spawn a specialist agent optimized for a specific task using evidence-based prompting techniques. This enhanced version integrates agent-creator principles, prompt-architect patterns, and systematic testing from functionality-audit.
Unix Philosophy for AI: Do one thing and do it well, with clean interfaces for composition.
Evidence-Based Agents: Every micro-skill spawns a specialist agent using research-validated techniques:
Key Principles:
✅ Perfect For:
❌ Don't Use For:
State in ONE sentence what this skill does:
Trigger Pattern: Define keywords for Claude Code discovery.
Using agent-creator + prompt-architect principles:
I am a [domain] specialist with expertise in:
- [Core competency 1]
- [Core competency 2]
- [Edge case handling]
- [Output quality standards]
For Factual Tasks (Self-Consistency):
Methodology:
1. Extract information from multiple perspectives
2. Cross-reference findings for consistency
3. Flag any inconsistencies or ambiguities
4. Provide confidence scores
5. Return validated results
For Analytical Tasks (Program-of-Thought):
Methodology:
1. Decompose problem into logical components
2. Work through each component systematically
3. Show intermediate reasoning
4. Validate logical consistency
5. Synthesize final analysis
For Complex Tasks (Plan-and-Solve):
Methodology:
1. Create comprehensive plan with dependencies
2. Break into executable steps
3. Execute plan systematically
4. Validate completion at each step
5. Return complete solution
Precise format enables reliable composition:
output:
format: json | markdown | code
structure:
required_fields: [...]
optional_fields: [...]
validation_rules: [...]
quality_standards: [...]
Common Failure Modes & Mitigations:
- [Failure type 1]: [How to detect and handle]
- [Failure type 2]: [How to detect and handle]
SKILL.md Template:
---
name: skill-name
description: [Specific trigger description]
tags: [domain, task-type, evidence-technique]
version: 1.0.0
---
# Skill Name
## Purpose
[Clear, single-sentence purpose]
## Specialist Agent
[Agent system prompt using evidence-based patterns]
## Input Contract
[Explicit input requirements]
## Output Contract
[Explicit output format and validation]
## Integration Points
- Cascades: [How it composes]
- Commands: [Slash command bindings]
- Other Skills: [Dependencies or companions]
Systematic Testing (from functionality-audit):
Test Cases:
1. Normal operation with typical inputs
2. Boundary conditions
3. Error cases with invalid inputs
4. Edge cases
5. Performance stress tests
Validation Checklist:
Enable Learning (from ruv-swarm):
training:
pattern: [cognitive pattern type]
feedback_collection: true
improvement_iteration: true
success_tracking: true
Agent System Prompt:
I am an extraction specialist using self-consistency checking for accuracy.
Methodology (Self-Consistency Pattern):
1. Scan source from multiple angles
2. Extract candidate information
3. Cross-validate findings
4. Flag confidence levels and ambiguities
5. Return structured data with metadata
Failure Modes:
- Ambiguous source: Flag for human review
- Missing information: Explicitly note gaps
- Low confidence: Provide alternative interpretations
Input/Output:
input:
source_document: string | file_path
target_schema: json_schema
confidence_threshold: number (default: 0.8)
output:
extracted_data: object (matches target_schema)
confidence_scores: object (per field)
ambiguities: array[string]
metadata:
extraction_quality: high | medium | low
processing_time: number
Agent System Prompt:
I am a validation specialist using program-of-thought decomposition.
Methodology (Program-of-Thought Pattern):
1. Parse input systematically
2. Load specification/rules
3. Check each rule with clear reasoning
4. Show validation logic step-by-step
5. Categorize violations by severity
Failure Modes:
- Ambiguous rules: Request clarification
- Conflicting rules: Flag inconsistencies
- Edge cases: Apply conservative interpretation
Input/Output:
input:
data: object | array
specification: schema | rules_file
strictness: lenient | normal | strict
output:
validation_result:
status: pass | fail | warning
violations: array[{rule, location, severity, message}]
summary: {errors: number, warnings: number}
suggested_fixes: array[{location, fix, confidence}]
Agent System Prompt:
I am a generation specialist using plan-and-solve framework.
Methodology (Plan-and-Solve Pattern):
1. Parse specification and understand requirements
2. Create comprehensive generation plan
3. Execute plan systematically
4. Validate output against requirements
5. Review for completeness and correctness
Failure Modes:
- Incomplete specification: Request missing details
- Ambiguous requirements: Provide multiple options
- Validation failures: Iterate with fixes
Input/Output:
input:
specification: object | markdown
templates: array[template] (optional)
config: object (generation parameters)
output:
generated_artifact: string | object
generation_metadata:
decisions_made: array[{decision, rationale}]
completeness_check: pass | partial | fail
warnings: array[string]
Agent System Prompt:
I am an analysis specialist combining program-of-thought and self-consistency.
Methodology:
1. Gather data systematically
2. Apply analytical framework (program-of-thought)
3. Identify patterns and anomalies
4. Validate conclusions (self-consistency)
5. Prioritize findings by importance
Failure Modes:
- Insufficient data: Flag and request more
- Conflicting indicators: Present both interpretations
- Uncertain conclusions: Provide confidence levels
Input/Output:
input:
data: object | array | file_path
analysis_type: quality | security | performance | etc
depth: shallow | normal | deep
output:
analysis_report:
key_findings: array[{finding, evidence, severity}]
recommendations: array[{action, priority, rationale}]
confidence_levels: object (per finding)
supporting_data: object
Composition Patterns:
# Sequential
extract-data → validate-data → transform-data → generate-report
# Parallel
input → [validate-schema + security-scan + quality-check] → merge-results
# Conditional
validate → (if pass: deploy) OR (if fail: generate-error-report)
# Map-Reduce
collection → map(analyze-item) → reduce(aggregate-results)
# Iterative
refactor → check-quality → (repeat if below threshold)
Command Binding Example:
command:
name: /validate-api
binding:
type: micro-skill
target: validate-api-response
parameter_mapping:
file: ${file_path}
schema: ${schema_path}
strict: ${--strict flag}
Invocation: "Create a micro-skill that [single responsibility] using [evidence technique] with [domain expertise]"
The creator will:
Integration:
Version 2.0 Enhancements:
development
Apple Human Interface Guidelines for content display components. Use this skill when the user asks about charts component, collection view, image view, web view, color well, image well, activity view, lockup, data visualization, content display, displaying images, rendering web content, color pickers, or presenting collections of items in Apple apps. Also use when the user says how should I display charts, what's the best way to show images, should I use a web view, how do I build a grid of items, what component shows media, or how do I present a share sheet. Cross-references: hig-foundations for color/typography/accessibility, hig-patterns for data visualization patterns, hig-components-layout for structural containers, hig-platforms for platform-specific component behavior.
tools
Automate HelpDesk tasks via Rube MCP (Composio): list tickets, manage views, use canned responses, and configure custom fields. Always search tools first for current schemas.
testing
Expert Haskell engineer specializing in advanced type systems, pure functional design, and high-reliability software. Use PROACTIVELY for type-level programming, concurrency, and architecture guidance.
tools
GraphQL gives clients exactly the data they need - no more, no less. One endpoint, typed schema, introspection. But the flexibility that makes it powerful also makes it dangerous. Without proper controls, clients can craft queries that bring down your server. This skill covers schema design, resolvers, DataLoader for N+1 prevention, federation for microservices, and client integration with Apollo/urql. Key insight: GraphQL is a contract. The schema is the API documentation. Design it carefully.