monomind 1.19.0 → 2.0.1

package/.claude/skills/mastermind-skills/receive-review.md

@@ -1,213 +0,0 @@
----
-name: mastermind-receive-review
-description: Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable — requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation
----
-
-# Code Review Reception
-
-## Overview
-
-Code review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.
-
-**Core principle:** Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.
-
-## The Response Pattern
-
-```
-WHEN receiving code review feedback:
-
-1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting
-2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words (or ask)
-3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality
-4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?
-5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback
-6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test each
-```
-
-## Forbidden Responses
-
-**NEVER:**
-- "You're absolutely right!" (explicit CLAUDE.md violation)
-- "Great point!" / "Excellent feedback!" (performative)
-- "Let me implement that now" (before verification)
-
-**INSTEAD:**
-- Restate the technical requirement
-- Ask clarifying questions
-- Push back with technical reasoning if wrong
-- Just start working (actions > words)
-
-## Handling Unclear Feedback
-
-```
-IF any item is unclear:
-  STOP - do not implement anything yet
-  ASK for clarification on unclear items
-
-WHY: Items may be related. Partial understanding = wrong implementation.
-```
-
-**Example:**
-```
-your human partner: "Fix 1-6"
-You understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.
-
-WRONG: Implement 1,2,3,6 now, ask about 4,5 later
-RIGHT: "I understand items 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before proceeding."
-```
-
-## Source-Specific Handling
-
-### From your human partner
-- **Trusted** — implement after understanding
-- **Still ask** if scope unclear
-- **No performative agreement**
-- **Skip to action** or technical acknowledgment
-
-### From External Reviewers
-```
-BEFORE implementing:
-  1. Check: Technically correct for THIS codebase?
-  2. Check: Breaks existing functionality?
-  3. Check: Reason for current implementation?
-  4. Check: Works on all platforms/versions?
-  5. Check: Does reviewer understand full context?
-
-IF suggestion seems wrong:
-  Push back with technical reasoning
-
-IF can't easily verify:
-  Say so: "I can't verify this without [X]. Should I [investigate/ask/proceed]?"
-
-IF conflicts with your human partner's prior decisions:
-  Stop and discuss with your human partner first
-```
-
-**Rule:** "External feedback — be skeptical, but check carefully"
-
-## YAGNI Check for "Professional" Features
-
-```
-IF reviewer suggests "implementing properly":
-  grep codebase for actual usage
-
-  IF unused: "This endpoint isn't called. Remove it (YAGNI)?"
-  IF used: Then implement properly
-```
-
-**Rule:** "You and reviewer both report to me. If we don't need this feature, don't add it."
-
-## Implementation Order
-
-```
-FOR multi-item feedback:
-  1. Clarify anything unclear FIRST
-  2. Then implement in this order:
-     - Blocking issues (breaks, security)
-     - Simple fixes (typos, imports)
-     - Complex fixes (refactoring, logic)
-  3. Test each fix individually
-  4. Verify no regressions
-```
-
-## When To Push Back
-
-Push back when:
-- Suggestion breaks existing functionality
-- Reviewer lacks full context
-- Violates YAGNI (unused feature)
-- Technically incorrect for this stack
-- Legacy/compatibility reasons exist
-- Conflicts with your human partner's architectural decisions
-
-**How to push back:**
-- Use technical reasoning, not defensiveness
-- Ask specific questions
-- Reference working tests/code
-- Involve your human partner if architectural
-
-**Signal if uncomfortable pushing back out loud:** "Strange things are afoot at the Circle K"
-
-## Acknowledging Correct Feedback
-
-When feedback IS correct:
-```
-"Fixed. [Brief description of what changed]"
-"Good catch - [specific issue]. Fixed in [location]."
-[Just fix it and show in the code]
-
-NEVER: "You're absolutely right!"
-NEVER: "Great point!"
-NEVER: "Thanks for catching that!"
-NEVER: "Thanks for [anything]"
-NEVER: ANY gratitude expression
-```
-
-**Why no thanks:** Actions speak. Just fix it. The code itself shows you heard the feedback.
-
-**If you catch yourself about to write "Thanks":** DELETE IT. State the fix instead.
-
-## Gracefully Correcting Your Pushback
-
-If you pushed back and were wrong:
-```
-"You were right - I checked [X] and it does [Y]. Implementing now."
-"Verified this and you're correct. My initial understanding was wrong because [reason]. Fixing."
-
-NEVER: Long apology
-NEVER: Defending why you pushed back
-NEVER: Over-explaining
-```
-
-State the correction factually and move on.
-
-## Common Mistakes
-
-| Mistake | Fix |
-|---------|-----|
-| Performative agreement | State requirement or just act |
-| Blind implementation | Verify against codebase first |
-| Batch without testing | One at a time, test each |
-| Assuming reviewer is right | Check if breaks things |
-| Avoiding pushback | Technical correctness > comfort |
-| Partial implementation | Clarify all items first |
-| Can't verify, proceed anyway | State limitation, ask for direction |
-
-## Real Examples
-
-**Performative Agreement (Bad):**
-```
-Reviewer: "Remove legacy code"
-"You're absolutely right! Let me remove that..."
-```
-
-**Technical Verification (Good):**
-```
-Reviewer: "Remove legacy code"
-"Checking... build target is 10.15+, this API needs 13+. Need legacy for backward compat. Current impl has wrong bundle ID - fix it or drop pre-13 support?"
-```
-
-**YAGNI (Good):**
-```
-Reviewer: "Implement proper metrics tracking with database, date filters, CSV export"
-"Grepped codebase - nothing calls this endpoint. Remove it (YAGNI)? Or is there usage I'm missing?"
-```
-
-**Unclear Item (Good):**
-```
-your human partner: "Fix items 1-6"
-You understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.
-"Understand 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before implementing."
-```
-
-## GitHub Thread Replies
-
-When replying to inline review comments on GitHub, reply in the comment thread (`gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr}/comments/{id}/replies`), not as a top-level PR comment.
-
-## The Bottom Line
-
-**External feedback = suggestions to evaluate, not orders to follow.**
-
-Verify. Question. Then implement.
-
-No performative agreement. Technical rigor always.

package/.claude/skills/mastermind-skills/references/copywriting-frameworks.md

@@ -1,181 +0,0 @@
-# Copywriting Frameworks Reference
-
-Headline formulas, page structure templates, CTA patterns, and writing principles for marketing pages. Use when writing or reviewing landing pages, homepages, pricing pages, feature pages, or any conversion-focused surface.
-
----
-
-## Writing Principles
-
-### The Hierarchy
-1. **Clarity over cleverness** — If you have to choose, choose clear
-2. **Benefits over features** — Features: what it does. Benefits: what that means for the customer
-3. **Specificity over vagueness** — "Cut weekly reporting from 4 hours to 15 minutes" beats "Save time on your workflow"
-4. **Customer language over company language** — Mirror words from reviews, interviews, support tickets
-5. **Active over passive** — "We generate reports" not "Reports are generated"
-6. **Confident over qualified** — Remove "almost", "very", "really", "quite"
-7. **One idea per section** — Each section advances one argument; build a logical flow down the page
-
-### Quick Quality Check
-- Jargon that could confuse an outsider?
-- Sentences trying to do too much?
-- Passive voice constructions?
-- Exclamation points? (remove them)
-- Marketing buzzwords without substance? (streamline, optimize, innovative, leverage)
-- "We/our" dominating over "you/your"?
-
----
-
-## Headline Formulas
-
-### Outcome-Focused
-- `{Achieve outcome} without {pain point}` → "Understand how users experience your site without drowning in numbers"
-- `{Achieve outcome} by {how product makes it possible}` → "Generate more leads by seeing which companies visit your site"
-- `Turn {input} into {outcome}` → "Turn your hard-earned sales into repeat customers"
-- `[Achieve outcome] in [timeframe]` → "Get your tax refund in 10 days"
-
-### Problem-Focused
-- `Never {unpleasant event} again` → "Never miss a sales opportunity again"
-- `{Question highlighting the main pain point}` → "Hate returning stuff to Amazon?"
-- `Stop [pain]. Start [pleasure].` → "Stop chasing invoices. Start getting paid on time."
-
-### Audience-Focused
-- `{Key feature} for {target audience}` → "Advanced analytics for Shopify stores"
-- `{Key feature} for {target audience} to {outcome}` → "An online whiteboard for teams to ideate together"
-- `You don't have to {skill} to {achieve outcome}` → "You don't have to be an SEO pro to rank higher"
-
-### Differentiation-Focused
-- `The {opposite of usual} way to {achieve outcome}` → "The easiest way to turn your passion into income"
-- `The [category] that [key differentiator]` → "The CRM that updates itself"
-
-### Proof-Focused
-- `[Number] [people] use [product] to [outcome]` → "50,000 marketers use Drip to send better emails"
-- `{Key benefit of your product}` → "Sound clear in online meetings"
-
-### Additional Formulas
-- `The simple way to {outcome}` → "The simple way to track your time"
-- `Finally, {category} that {benefit}` → "Finally, accounting software that doesn't suck"
-- `{Outcome} without {common pain}` → "Build your website without writing code"
-- `What if you could {desirable outcome}?` → "What if you could close deals 30% faster?"
-- `Everything you need to {outcome}` → "Everything you need to launch your course"
-- `The {adjective} {category} built for {audience}` → "The lightweight CRM built for startups"
-- `{Action verb} your {thing} like {admirable example}` → "Market your SaaS like a Fortune 500"
-
----
-
-## Page Structure
-
-### Above the Fold
-**Headline** — Single most important message. Core value prop. Specific > generic.
-**Subheadline** — Expands headline. Adds specificity. 1-2 sentences max.
-**Primary CTA** — Action-oriented. Communicate what they get: "Start Free Trial" > "Sign Up"
-**Supporting element** — Social proof count, trust badge, or hero image
-
-### Core Section Types
-| Section | Purpose | Notes |
-|---|---|---|
-| Social Proof | Build credibility | Logos near CTA, stats, specific testimonials |
-| Problem / Pain | Show you understand | Mirror customer language, not company framing |
-| Solution / Benefits | Connect to outcomes | 3-5 key benefits, not feature list |
-| How It Works | Reduce complexity | 3-4 numbered steps |
-| Objection Handling | Remove hesitation | FAQ, comparison, guarantee |
-| Final CTA | Recap + action | Restate value, repeat CTA, risk reversal |
-
-### Page Templates
-
-**Compact Landing Page** (single offer, cold traffic):
-Above fold → Social proof strip → Problem → Solution/benefits → How it works → Testimonials → CTA
-
-**Feature-Heavy Product Page**:
-Above fold → Social proof → Core value → Feature 1 (problem → feature → benefit) → Feature 2 → Feature 3 → Testimonials → FAQ → CTA
-
-**Enterprise / B2B Landing Page**:
-Above fold (value + credibility) → Problem/stakes → Solution overview → Proof (logos + case study) → How it works → Security/compliance → Testimonials → CTA + Demo request
-
-**Product Launch Page**:
-Above fold (bold announcement) → Why now → What it is → Key capabilities → Social proof from beta → Pricing → FAQ → CTA
-
----
-
-## CTA Copy Guidelines
-
-### Weak CTAs (avoid)
-Submit, Sign Up, Learn More, Click Here, Get Started, Download
-
-### Strong CTAs (use)
-- "Start Free Trial"
-- "Get [Specific Thing]" → "Get the Complete Checklist"
-- "See [Product] in Action"
-- "Create Your First [Thing]"
-- "[Action] for Free"
-
-### Formula
-`[Action Verb] + [What They Get] + [Qualifier if needed]`
-- "Start My Free Trial"
-- "See Pricing for My Team"
-- "Download the 2025 Report"
-
----
-
-## Page-Specific Copy Guidance
-
-### Homepage
-- Serve multiple audiences without being generic
-- Lead with broadest value proposition
-- Provide clear paths for different visitor intents ("I'm a designer" / "I'm an engineer")
-- Don't try to close — guide toward the right next page or CTA
-
-### Landing Page
-- Single message, single CTA — remove navigation if possible
-- Match headline exactly to the ad or email that sent traffic here
-- Complete the argument on one page; don't assume they'll come back
-
-### Pricing Page
-- Help visitors choose the right plan — answer "which is right for me?"
-- Make recommended plan obvious (badge, highlight, preselected)
-- Address the top 3-4 objections in an FAQ
-- Annual toggle with savings stated in dollars and percentage
-
-### Feature Page
-- Connect: feature → benefit → outcome (not feature → feature → feature)
-- Show use cases and examples, not just capabilities
-- Clear path to try or buy at the bottom
-
-### About Page
-- Tell the story of why this exists (founding insight or problem)
-- Connect mission to customer benefit
-- Still include a CTA — this is often a high-intent page
-
----
-
-## Writing for Trust
-
-### Social Proof Placement
-- Customer logos: above the fold (strip) and near primary CTA
-- Testimonials: specific quote + name + title + company + photo; near the claim they validate
-- Numbers: exact figures beat vague ("10,247 teams" not "thousands of teams")
-- Reviews: third-party star ratings add credibility you can't self-claim
-
-### Objection Handling
-Name the objection directly, then resolve it:
-- "What if it's not right for us?" → Money-back guarantee / free trial
-- "How long does setup take?" → "Live in 10 minutes, no IT required"
-- "Is my data secure?" → SOC 2 Type II, encryption at rest, specific certifications
-
-### Risk Reversals
-- "Free 14-day trial, no credit card required"
-- "Cancel anytime — no questions asked"
-- "30-day money-back guarantee"
-- "Free migration assistance"
-
----
-
-## Copy Anti-Patterns
-
-Never:
-- Start a CTA with "Click here" or "Learn more" — be specific about the outcome
-- Use passive voice in problem statements ("An error was encountered")
-- Hedge: "This might help", "You may want to", "Perhaps consider"
-- Restate the heading in the first sentence of body copy
-- Write "Successfully saved" when "Saved" says the same in half the words
-- Use em dashes — use commas, colons, or periods instead
-- Open with "We are pleased to announce..." or "We are excited to share..."

package/.claude/skills/mastermind-skills/references/persuasion-psychology.md

@@ -1,158 +0,0 @@
-# Persuasion Psychology Reference
-
-Mental models, cognitive biases, and behavioral frameworks for marketing. Apply these when writing copy, designing campaigns, structuring pricing, or briefing agents on how to frame their output.
-
----
-
-## Quick Reference: Challenge → Models
-
-| Challenge | Apply These |
-|---|---|
-| Low conversions | Hick's Law, Activation Energy, BJ Fogg, friction reduction |
-| Price objections | Anchoring, Framing, Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion |
-| Building trust | Authority, Social Proof, Reciprocity, Mere Exposure |
-| Creating urgency | Scarcity, Loss Aversion, Zeigarnik Effect |
-| Retention/churn | Endowment Effect, Switching Costs, Status-Quo Bias |
-| Growth stalling | Theory of Constraints, Pareto, Feedback Loops |
-| Decision paralysis | Paradox of Choice, Default Effect, Decoy Effect |
-| Onboarding | Goal-Gradient, IKEA Effect, Commitment & Consistency |
-| Cold outreach | Reciprocity, Authority, Liking/Similarity, Mere Exposure |
-
----
-
-## Cognitive Biases
-
-### Anchoring Effect
-The first number seen heavily influences subsequent judgments. Show the higher price first (enterprise tier, competitor price, original price) to anchor expectations before revealing your price.
-
-### Loss Aversion
-Losses feel roughly twice as painful as equivalent gains. Frame in terms of what they'll lose by not acting. "Don't miss out" outperforms "You could gain." "Stop losing $X/week" beats "Save $X/week."
-
-### Social Proof / Bandwagon Effect
-People follow what others are doing. Popularity signals quality and safety. Show customer counts, testimonials with photos, company logos, review scores, and "trending" indicators near CTAs.
-
-### Scarcity / Urgency
-Limited availability increases perceived value. Limited-time offers, low-stock warnings, and exclusive access create urgency. Only use when genuine — fake scarcity destroys trust permanently.
-
-### Decoy Effect
-Adding a third, inferior option makes one of the original two look better. A pricing tier that's clearly worse value makes your preferred tier look like the obvious choice.
-
-### Framing Effect
-Same facts, different frames. "90% success rate" vs. "10% failure rate" are identical but feel different. Frame positively. "Keep your savings" beats "Avoid losing money."
-
-### Default Effect
-People accept pre-selected options. Defaults are powerful. Pre-select the plan you want customers to choose. The recommended tier should be visually pre-selected.
-
-### Paradox of Choice
-Too many options overwhelm and paralyze. Fewer choices often lead to more decisions. Three pricing tiers beat seven. One clear CTA beats three. Recommend a single "best for most" option.
-
-### Goal-Gradient Effect
-People accelerate effort as they approach a goal. Show progress bars, completion percentages, and "almost there" messaging to drive completion in onboarding and signup flows.
-
-### Endowment Effect
-People value things more once they own them. Free trials, samples, and freemium models let customers "own" the product before committing, making them reluctant to give it up.
-
-### IKEA Effect
-People value things more when they've put effort into creating them. Let customers customize, configure, or build something during onboarding. Their investment increases perceived value.
-
-### Zero-Price Effect
-"Free" is psychologically different from low-priced. The jump from $1 to $0 is disproportionately powerful. Free tiers, free shipping, and free trials have outsized appeal.
-
-### Status-Quo Bias
-People prefer the current state. Change feels risky. Reduce friction to switch: "Import your data in one click." Make the transition feel safe and easy, not effortful.
-
-### Zeigarnik Effect
-Unfinished tasks occupy the mind. Open loops create tension. "You're 80% done" creates pull to finish. Abandoned carts, incomplete profiles, and progress indicators leverage this.
-
-### Mere Exposure Effect
-Familiarity breeds liking. Consistent brand presence builds preference over time. Repetition across channels creates comfort and trust — even without explicit recall.
-
-### Confirmation Bias
-People seek information confirming existing beliefs. Understand what your audience already believes and align messaging accordingly. Fighting beliefs head-on rarely works.
-
-### Hyperbolic Discounting / Present Bias
-People strongly prefer immediate rewards. Emphasize immediate benefits ("Start saving time today") over future ones ("You'll see ROI in 6 months").
-
----
-
-## Persuasion Principles
-
-### Reciprocity
-People feel obligated to return favors. Give first: free content, free tools, generous free tiers create reciprocal obligation. Give value before asking for anything.
-
-### Commitment & Consistency
-Once people commit, they want to stay consistent. Get small commitments first (email signup, free trial). People who've taken one step are more likely to take the next.
-
-### Authority Bias
-People defer to experts. Feature expert endorsements, certifications, "as seen in" logos, and thought leadership content. Credentials reduce perceived risk.
-
-### Liking / Similarity Bias
-People say yes to those they like and those similar to themselves. "Built by marketers for marketers" signals similarity. Use relatable spokespeople and shared-values positioning.
-
-### Scarcity (see Cognitive Biases above)
-
-### Unity Principle
-Shared identity drives influence. Position your brand as part of the customer's tribe. Use insider language and shared values.
-
----
-
-## Pricing Psychology
-
-### Charm Pricing / Left-Digit Effect
-Prices ending in 9 seem significantly lower than the next round number. $99 feels much cheaper than $100. Use for value-focused products.
-
-### Rounded-Price (Fluency) Effect
-Round numbers feel premium. $100 signals quality; $99 signals value. Use round prices for premium products, charm prices for value products.
-
-### Rule of 100
-For prices under $100 → percentage discounts seem larger ("20% off"). For prices over $100 → absolute discounts seem larger ("$50 off").
-
-### Mental Accounting
-Same price framed differently changes perception. "$1/day" feels cheaper than "$30/month." "Less than your morning coffee" reframes the expense.
-
----
-
-## Behavioral Models
-
-### BJ Fogg Behavior Model
-Behavior = Motivation × Ability × Prompt. All three must be present for action. High motivation but hard to do = won't happen. Easy to do but no prompt = won't happen. Design for all three in every CTA.
-
-### EAST Framework
-Make desired behaviors: **Easy** (reduce friction), **Attractive** (appealing visually and verbally), **Social** (show others doing it), **Timely** (ask at the right moment in the journey).
-
-### Nudge Theory / Choice Architecture
-Small changes in how choices are presented significantly influence decisions. Default selections, strategic ordering, and friction reduction guide behavior without restricting choice.
-
-### Activation Energy
-The initial energy required to start. High activation energy prevents action even if the overall task is easy. Pre-fill forms, offer templates, show quick wins. Make the first step trivially easy.
-
-### Feedback Loops
-Output becomes input. Build virtuous cycles: more users → more content → better SEO → more users. Identify and strengthen positive feedback loops in your marketing system.
-
-### Flywheel Effect
-Sustained effort creates self-sustaining momentum. Content → traffic → leads → customers → case studies → more content. Each element powers the next.
-
-### Theory of Constraints
-Every system has one bottleneck. Fix the constraint before optimizing elsewhere. If funnel converts well but traffic is low, more CRO won't help. Fix the bottleneck first.
-
----
-
-## Mental Models for Strategy
-
-### Jobs to Be Done
-People don't buy products — they hire them to get a job done. A drill buyer wants a hole. Frame around the job (outcome), not the tool (feature).
-
-### First Principles
-Break problems down to basic truths. Ask "why" repeatedly to find root causes. Don't assume you need content marketing because competitors do — ask what problem it solves.
-
-### Inversion
-Ask "What would guarantee failure?" then systematically prevent those things. List everything that would make your campaign fail before building it.
-
-### Pareto Principle (80/20)
-80% of results come from 20% of efforts. Find the 20% of channels, customers, or content driving 80% of results. Cut or reduce the rest.
-
-### Second-Order Thinking
-Consider effects of effects. A flash sale boosts revenue (first order) but trains customers to wait for discounts (second order). Think two moves ahead.
-
-### Barbell Strategy
-Put 80% of budget into proven channels, 20% into experimental bets. Avoid moderate-risk, moderate-reward middle ground.