Automates real browsers from the command line using a ref-based snapshot-then-interact workflow. Use when you need to drive a live browser, navigating pages, filling and submitting forms, clicking buttons, taking screenshots, scraping or extracting data, testing or logging into web apps, mocking network requests, or verifying responsive layouts. Triggers include "open a website", "fill out this form", "take a screenshot", "scrape this page", "test this web app", "log in to a site", "automate browser actions", or any task requiring programmatic web interaction via the agent-browser CLI.
Detects question-shaped input and forces a literal answer before any action. Use when the user's message contains "?" or trigger patterns like "why did you…?", "will that work?", "have you considered…?", "shouldn't we…?", "doesn't that…?", "is that correct?", especially when the question challenges a decision, requests an assessment, or could be misread as criticism.
Builds production-ready HTTP APIs with thin handlers, consistent error envelopes, health/readiness checks, CORS, idempotency, rate limiting, and graceful shutdown. Use when designing or implementing HTTP endpoints, writing orpc route factories, defining Zod request/response schemas, mapping domain errors to status codes, or adding operational concerns (health checks, X-Request-ID, Retry-After) to a TypeScript API.
Guides completion of development work by verifying tests, presenting structured merge/PR/keep/discard options, and executing the chosen cleanup. Use when implementation is complete and tests pass, when wrapping up a feature branch, or when deciding how to land or discard work.
Traces a code execution path with file:line references and an execution diagram before any change is made, forcing real understanding of fn(args, deps) flows, Result propagation, and workflow composition. Use before fixing a bug, implementing a feature, refactoring, or starting a TDD cycle, whenever you are about to change non-trivial code.
Receives code review feedback through technical verification rather than performative agreement or blind implementation. Use when receiving review comments, before implementing reviewer suggestions, when feedback is unclear, or when a suggestion may be wrong for this codebase.
Enforces extreme brevity and high signal-to-noise ratio so every word justifies its existence. Strips filler phrases, preambles, announcements, and unnecessary elaboration. Use when writing any response, commit message, PR description, README, implementation plan, or status update, when you catch yourself opening with "I'll help you with that" or "Let me explain", or when output is drifting into paragraphs where a list or table would carry more information in fewer words.
Forces honest, calibrated confidence assessment instead of vague certainty. Expresses confidence as a percentage, shows the evidence behind it, explains every gap below 100%, and gathers more evidence before concluding when possible. Use when about to state a root cause, diagnosis, or conclusion ("the problem is", "definitely", "clearly the issue", "complete clarity"), when an answer would mislead if it looked more certain than it is, or any time you're presenting an investigation result the user will act on.