4regab/pstack

Sketch types, signatures, and module structure before code, then stay in the loop while implementation fills in. Use for /architect, 'architect this', 'design this', or non-trivial work where jumping to code would lock in the wrong shape.

Spawn N parallel candidates at the same task, pick a base, graft the strongest parts of the losers into it. Use for /arena, 'arena this', 'throw it in the arena', or when one attempt at a non-trivial artifact would lock in the wrong shape.

Create or update a personal Kiro mode skill from the user's stated working preferences and optional exported conversation evidence. Use for automate me, create or refresh my mode skill, or capture my working style as an Agent Skill.

Find what a change could break somewhere else before it ships, beyond the diff, and prove the one fact it's safe because of by running real code instead of writing it up. Use for 'blast radius of X', 'what could this break', or reviewing a small diff you don't trust.

Restate the last message in plain human language, with no jargon.

Generate a project-local verification skill that drives your app the way a user does — any language, framework, or platform. Use for /create-verification-skill, "make a control skill for this repo", or when a project has no scripted way to prove UI/CLI/service behavior.

Design an auditable playbook when no narrower one fits: a large migration, an ambitious multi-part change, or work a human reviews after stepping away. Scales rigor to the task, runs a hypothesis loop, and logs decisions via show-me-your-work. Use for /figure-it-out, 'figure it out', a large migration, or when no narrower playbook applies.

Use for "how does X work", code walkthroughs before changing something, and placement / ownership / layering questions ("where should this live", "which package owns this", "is this the right layer"). Explains subsystem architecture, runtime flow, onboarding mental models. Can critique architecture. Use why for motivation.

Use for "interrogate", "adversarial review", "multi-model review", "challenge this", "stress test this code", "find blind spots", or "tear this apart". Multiple LLM reviewers challenge changes from independent angles.

Periodic pass that keeps a project's verification skill and feature map honest: parallel source readers per feature, one live session driving every feature, at most one PR of proven corrections. Use for /maintain-verification-skill or "audit the verify skill".

Review comments and suppressions with the named comment-sicko Kiro subagent, apply only accepted in-scope findings, and offer enforceable replacements for claimed constraints. Use for no-comments or comment cleanup.

Rigorous playbooks for concise communication, simple code, deliberate delegation, and evidence-based verification.

Apply when wiring validation, error handling, or framework adapters. Concentrate guards at system boundaries (CLI, config, network, external APIs); trust internal types and keep business logic in pure functions.

Apply to any non-trivial work, not just bulk work: edits, migrations, analyses, checks. Build the tool that does it or proves it (codemod, script, generator, or a skill your subagents follow) instead of working by hand. The tool is the artifact a reviewer can rerun.

Apply when you catch yourself writing the same instruction a second time, or notice a recurring correction. Encode the rule as a lint, metadata flag, runtime check, or script instead of more text.

Apply when facing a novel UI interaction or architectural decision with no precedent in the codebase. Build 2-3 competing prototypes and compare side by side before committing.

Apply when product, UX, or feature-scope tradeoffs come up. Choose user delight over implementation convenience; ship fewer polished features over more rough ones.

Apply when debugging. Trace each symptom to its root cause and fix it there; reproduce first, ask why until you reach it, resist nil-check guards that silence crashes.

Apply before writing logic: choosing core types and data structures, sequencing scaffold-vs-feature work, asking what concurrent actors share. Get the data structures right so downstream code becomes obvious.

Apply when context is filling up: large outputs, long files, repeated reads, fan-out planning. Route bulk to subagents; keep summaries in the main thread, not raw payloads.

Apply when refactoring, evaluating diff size, or tempted to add abstractions, layers, or signal threading. Bias toward deletion and the smallest change that solves the problem.

Apply when designing commands, lifecycle steps, or processing loops that run amid crashes, restarts, and retries. Converge to the same end state regardless of partial prior runs.

Apply when introducing a new internal API while old callers still exist. Migrate callers and delete the old API in the same wave instead of preserving compatibility layers.

Apply when reviewing or shaping code that's hard to trace. Count layers between question and answer, and hidden state in the reader's head; collapse one-caller wrappers and shrink mutable scope.

Apply when writing stateful logic, or when code branches a lot or repeats a shape assumption across files. Encode the domain in a structure instead of scattered conditionals.

Apply when tempted to ask 'should I do X?' on reversible work. Proceed, present the result, let the human course-correct after the fact; reserve confirmation for irreversible actions.

Apply during planned rewrites and migrations with explicit phase boundaries. Converge on the target architecture; don't preserve smooth intermediate states with throwaway compatibility code.

Apply after completing a task, before declaring done. Verify against the real artifact (run the feature, read the actual value, inspect the diff), not a proxy, self-report, or 'it compiles.'

Apply when integrating a new requirement into an existing design. Redesign as if the requirement had been a foundational assumption from day one, instead of bolting it on.

Apply when concurrent actors might write to the same file, branch, key, or state object. Eliminate the sharing first; serialize structurally only when one shared writer is a real invariant.

Apply to multi-step work (sweeps, migrations, runs of similar edits) and to how you stack commits and PRs. Break work into small units that each end in a verifiable state, check each before the next, and order delivery so the sequence proves itself to a reviewer.

Apply when sequencing an addition, refactor, or rewrite. Remove dead weight, redundant validators, and stub references first, then build on the simpler base.

Apply when designing types, reviewing a function signature, or writing code in any statically-typed language. Make illegal states unrepresentable, brand semantic primitives, parse external data at boundaries, refuse to lie to the compiler, exhaust variants, derive from authoritative schemas.

Reconstruct recent working context from exported conversation history, current context, live state, and shared records such as prior fixes and incidents. Use for 'recall my work on X', 'catch me up', 'what have I been working on', or 'where did I leave off'.

Review an exported transcript or the current conversation with three independent lenses, surface durable learnings, and route approved findings to concrete Agent Skill edits. Use when the user says reflect.

Configure model selection for pstack on Kiro IDE or CLI without a separate model registry. Use for setup-pstack, configuring pstack models, or pinning a named custom agent to an available model.

Keep a reviewable decision trail for long-running or unattended work: a TSV log with one row per decision (what, why, evidence, result). Local by default; commit it when a reviewer needs the trail to trust the result. Use for /show-me-your-work, autonomous or multi-phase runs, or work a human reviews after stepping away.

Fan out N parallel workers, drain them, and return one report. Use for /swarm, 'swarm this', or parallel coverage, races, gauntlets, and exploration.

Use only when the user explicitly asks for TDD, a failing test, or a regression test, OR when the bug has an obvious cheap local test target. Skip when the test path is unclear, expensive, integration-heavy, or not requested.

Explain a body of work plainly so a person actually understands it. Runs the how and why skills and weaves what they find into one clear explanation. Use for 'teach me this', 'help me really understand X', 'explain this change or subsystem to me'.

Layered technical-writing standard: Diátaxis structure, Google developer style sentences, STE instruction rules, Global English syntax. Use for /technical-writing or when writing or reviewing docs, RFCs, readmes, PR descriptions, or commit messages.

TypeScript best practices. Use when reading or editing any .ts or .tsx file.

Cut AI tells from any writing. Must always apply.

Use for 'why does X work this way', 'why we picked Y', design rationale, regressions, postmortems, or data-backed thresholds. Discovers available MCPs and queries each evidence category (source control, issue tracker, long-form docs, real-time chat, infrastructure observability, error tracking, product analytics warehouse) in parallel, then returns a cited read on decisions and tradeoffs. Use how for runtime behavior.