Claude Skills by Ovid

Cut a paad release — pick the semver bump from what is in [Unreleased], run make release, merge, tag, and verify the published plugin

Read the feature roadmap, find the next unplanned phase, brainstorm it, and update the roadmap with the resulting document name

Use when auditing a user-facing app — web, mobile (iOS/Android/React Native/Flutter), desktop, CLI, or games — for accessibility barriers or WCAG 2.2 conformance, before shipping UI changes, or in response to concerns about screen-reader, keyboard, low-vision, motor, cognitive, or photosensitive users. Not for general bug hunting or code correctness.

Use when assessing the architectural health of a codebase — before a major refactor, when onboarding to an unfamiliar repo, after rapid growth, when planning a redesign, or to surface structural strengths and risks before they become expensive. Not for fixing what it finds, and not for reviewing a branch diff.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when looking for meaningfully duplicated logic in a codebase, especially duplicate behavior hidden behind different names, different syntax, different control flow, or independently evolved implementations. Not for style issues, not for syntactic clone detection, and not for fixing what it finds.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when code needs a security review against the OWASP Top 10:2025 — access control, misconfiguration, supply chain, cryptography, injection, insecure design, authentication, integrity, logging and alerting, and mishandled exceptional conditions. Not for penetration testing a running system, not for infrastructure-only scanning, and not for fixing what it finds.

Use when reviewing current branch for bugs before pushing or merging, when wanting a thorough multi-agent review of local changes, or when preparing work for human review. Not for codebase structure, not for code style, and not for fixing what it finds.

Use when verifying that requirements/specs/PRDs and their implementation plans match — before starting work, after a spec or plan update, or when suspecting coverage gaps, scope creep, or design drift between intent and action documents. Needs both documents; not for checking code against a spec.

Use when working through architectural flaws documented in a .reviews/architecture/ report — selecting which flaws to fix, resuming a partial fix session across multiple sittings, or applying structural changes that need to be tracked back to a report. Not for producing that report — run the agentic-architecture skill first if there isn't one.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when a session is running out of context and the work needs to continue in a fresh one, or when starting a session meant to pick up where an earlier one stopped. Not for compacting in place — that is /compact — and not for specifying work that has not started, which is a plan.

Use when reviewing a spec, PRD, requirements doc, or design plan before implementation begins — especially when the doc feels too big, bundles unrelated features, may contradict the current codebase, or seems vague, infeasible, or thin on security and error handling. Not for cross-checking a spec against a plan — that's the alignment skill.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when options, a recommendation, or an already-chosen approach are on the table and the reasoning under them has not been independently checked — especially when the case rests on cited documentation, remembered behavior, or premises nobody verified. Not for generating alternatives, and not for critiquing a spec, which is the pushback skill.

EXPERIMENTAL. Analyzes a repository and any existing test suite, grades existing tests for weakness, classifies mocks, emits a phased roadmap for building a test suite that catches real regressions, then executes those phases one at a time. Use when planning or building a test suite, assessing whether existing tests are worth anything, adding tests to a legacy codebase, or when the user mentions test coverage, test strategy, or weak tests. Not for reviewing a branch for bugs, and not for fixi...

Use when making a small, quick change — a bug fix, typo, minor feature, tweak, or anything the user calls "vibe coding" — that looks like 1-3 files in the same module

Use when auditing a user-facing app — web, mobile (iOS/Android/React Native/Flutter), desktop, CLI, or games — for accessibility barriers or WCAG 2.2 conformance, before shipping UI changes, or in response to concerns about screen-reader, keyboard, low-vision, motor, cognitive, or photosensitive users. Not for general bug hunting or code correctness.

Use when assessing the architectural health of a codebase — before a major refactor, when onboarding to an unfamiliar repo, after rapid growth, when planning a redesign, or to surface structural strengths and risks before they become expensive. Not for fixing what it finds, and not for reviewing a branch diff.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when looking for meaningfully duplicated logic in a codebase, especially duplicate behavior hidden behind different names, different syntax, different control flow, or independently evolved implementations. Not for style issues, not for syntactic clone detection, and not for fixing what it finds.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when code needs a security review against the OWASP Top 10:2025 — access control, misconfiguration, supply chain, cryptography, injection, insecure design, authentication, integrity, logging and alerting, and mishandled exceptional conditions. Not for penetration testing a running system, not for infrastructure-only scanning, and not for fixing what it finds.

Use when reviewing current branch for bugs before pushing or merging, when wanting a thorough multi-agent review of local changes, or when preparing work for human review. Not for codebase structure, not for code style, and not for fixing what it finds.

Use when verifying that requirements/specs/PRDs and their implementation plans match — before starting work, after a spec or plan update, or when suspecting coverage gaps, scope creep, or design drift between intent and action documents. Needs both documents; not for checking code against a spec.

Use when working through architectural flaws documented in a .reviews/architecture/ report — selecting which flaws to fix, resuming a partial fix session across multiple sittings, or applying structural changes that need to be tracked back to a report. Not for producing that report — run the agentic-architecture skill first if there isn't one.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when a session is running out of context and the work needs to continue in a fresh one, or when starting a session meant to pick up where an earlier one stopped. Not for compacting in place — that is /compact — and not for specifying work that has not started, which is a plan.

Use when reviewing a spec, PRD, requirements doc, or design plan before implementation begins — especially when the doc feels too big, bundles unrelated features, may contradict the current codebase, or seems vague, infeasible, or thin on security and error handling. Not for cross-checking a spec against a plan — that's the alignment skill.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when options, a recommendation, or an already-chosen approach are on the table and the reasoning under them has not been independently checked — especially when the case rests on cited documentation, remembered behavior, or premises nobody verified. Not for generating alternatives, and not for critiquing a spec, which is the pushback skill.

EXPERIMENTAL. Analyzes a repository and any existing test suite, grades existing tests for weakness, classifies mocks, emits a phased roadmap for building a test suite that catches real regressions, then executes those phases one at a time. Use when planning or building a test suite, assessing whether existing tests are worth anything, adding tests to a legacy codebase, or when the user mentions test coverage, test strategy, or weak tests. Not for reviewing a branch for bugs, and not for fixi...

Use when making a small, quick change — a bug fix, typo, minor feature, tweak, or anything the user calls "vibe coding" — that looks like 1-3 files in the same module

Use when auditing a user-facing app — web, mobile (iOS/Android/React Native/Flutter), desktop, CLI, or games — for accessibility barriers or WCAG 2.2 conformance, before shipping UI changes, or in response to concerns about screen-reader, keyboard, low-vision, motor, cognitive, or photosensitive users. Not for general bug hunting or code correctness.

Use when assessing the architectural health of a codebase — before a major refactor, when onboarding to an unfamiliar repo, after rapid growth, when planning a redesign, or to surface structural strengths and risks before they become expensive. Not for fixing what it finds, and not for reviewing a branch diff.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when looking for meaningfully duplicated logic in a codebase, especially duplicate behavior hidden behind different names, different syntax, different control flow, or independently evolved implementations. Not for style issues, not for syntactic clone detection, and not for fixing what it finds.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when code needs a security review against the OWASP Top 10:2025 — access control, misconfiguration, supply chain, cryptography, injection, insecure design, authentication, integrity, logging and alerting, and mishandled exceptional conditions. Not for penetration testing a running system, not for infrastructure-only scanning, and not for fixing what it finds.

Use when reviewing current branch for bugs before pushing or merging, when wanting a thorough multi-agent review of local changes, or when preparing work for human review. Not for codebase structure, not for code style, and not for fixing what it finds.

Use when verifying that requirements/specs/PRDs and their implementation plans match — before starting work, after a spec or plan update, or when suspecting coverage gaps, scope creep, or design drift between intent and action documents. Needs both documents; not for checking code against a spec.

Use when working through architectural flaws documented in a paad/architecture-reviews/ report — selecting which flaws to fix, resuming a partial fix session across multiple sittings, or applying structural changes that need to be tracked back to a report. Not for producing that report — run /agentic-architecture first if there isn't one.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when a session is running out of context and the work needs to continue in a fresh one, or when starting a session meant to pick up where an earlier one stopped. Not for compacting in place — that is /compact — and not for specifying work that has not started, which is a plan.

Use when creating or updating a Makefile for a project, especially when standard targets (build, test, lint, format, etc.) are missing or when modifying targets that may already be wired into other tooling. Not for debugging why a build fails.

Use when the user asks which paad skills exist, what a paad skill does, which one fits their situation, or how to invoke one — including "what can paad do", "list the paad skills", "is there a paad skill for X", or a request for the arguments of a named paad skill

Use when reviewing a spec, PRD, requirements doc, or design plan before implementation begins — especially when the doc feels too big, bundles unrelated features, may contradict the current codebase, or seems vague, infeasible, or thin on security and error handling. Not for cross-checking a spec against a plan — that's /alignment.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when options, a recommendation, or an already-chosen approach are on the table and the reasoning under them has not been independently checked — especially when the case rests on cited documentation, remembered behavior, or premises nobody verified. Not for generating alternatives, and not for critiquing a spec, which is /pushback.

EXPERIMENTAL. Analyzes a repository and any existing test suite, grades existing tests for weakness, classifies mocks, emits a phased roadmap for building a test suite that catches real regressions, then executes those phases one at a time. Use when planning or building a test suite, assessing whether existing tests are worth anything, adding tests to a legacy codebase, or when the user mentions test coverage, test strategy, or weak tests. Not for reviewing a branch for bugs, and not for fixi...

Use when making a small, quick change — a bug fix, typo, minor feature, tweak, or anything the user calls "vibe coding" — that looks like 1-3 files in the same module

Use when auditing a user-facing app — web, mobile (iOS/Android/React Native/Flutter), desktop, CLI, or games — for accessibility barriers or WCAG 2.2 conformance, before shipping UI changes, or in response to concerns about screen-reader, keyboard, low-vision, motor, cognitive, or photosensitive users. Not for general bug hunting or code correctness.

Use when assessing the architectural health of a codebase — before a major refactor, when onboarding to an unfamiliar repo, after rapid growth, when planning a redesign, or to surface structural strengths and risks before they become expensive. Not for fixing what it finds, and not for reviewing a branch diff.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when looking for meaningfully duplicated logic in a codebase, especially duplicate behavior hidden behind different names, different syntax, different control flow, or independently evolved implementations. Not for style issues, not for syntactic clone detection, and not for fixing what it finds.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when code needs a security review against the OWASP Top 10:2025 — access control, misconfiguration, supply chain, cryptography, injection, insecure design, authentication, integrity, logging and alerting, and mishandled exceptional conditions. Not for penetration testing a running system, not for infrastructure-only scanning, and not for fixing what it finds.

Use when reviewing current branch for bugs before pushing or merging, when wanting a thorough multi-agent review of local changes, or when preparing work for human review. Not for codebase structure, not for code style, and not for fixing what it finds.

Use when verifying that requirements/specs/PRDs and their implementation plans match — before starting work, after a spec or plan update, or when suspecting coverage gaps, scope creep, or design drift between intent and action documents. Needs both documents; not for checking code against a spec.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when working the project-wide out-of-scope backlog at paad/code-reviews/backlog.md — cleaning it of entries that are already fixed or gone, or picking the next entry and fixing it end-to-end. Not for producing backlog entries — that is /agentic-review — and not for reviewing a branch diff.

Use when working through architectural flaws documented in a paad/architecture-reviews/ report — selecting which flaws to fix, resuming a partial fix session across multiple sittings, or applying structural changes that need to be tracked back to a report. Not for producing that report — run /agentic-architecture first if there isn't one.

EXPERIMENTAL. Use when a session is running out of context and the work needs to continue in a fresh one, or when starting a session meant to pick up where an earlier one stopped. Not for compacting in place — that is /compact — and not for specifying work that has not started, which is a plan.

Use when creating or updating a Makefile for a project, especially when standard targets (build, test, lint, format, etc.) are missing or when modifying targets that may already be wired into other tooling. Not for debugging why a build fails.