When building infrastructure, verify it's actually connected to the system before marking as complete.
Works with
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versioncompletion-checkExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches completion-check from parcadei/continuous-claude-v3 and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate completion-check. Access via /completion-check in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
0
total installs
0
this week
3.7K
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
0
installs
0
this week
3.7K
stars
When building infrastructure, verify it's actually connected to the system before marking as complete.
Infrastructure is not done when the code is written - it's done when it's wired into the system and actively used. Dead code (built but never called) is wasted effort.
Trace the execution path - Follow from user intent to actual code execution:
# Example: Verify Task tool spawns correctly
grep -r "claude -p" src/
grep -r "Task(" src/
Check hooks are registered, not just implemented:
# Hook exists?
ls -la .claude/hooks/my-hook.sh
# Hook registered in settings?
grep "my-hook" .claude/settings.json
Verify database connections - Ensure infrastructure uses the right backend:
# Check connection strings
grep -r "postgresql://" src/
grep -r "sqlite:" src/ # Should NOT find if PostgreSQL expected
Test end-to-end - Run the feature and verify infrastructure is invoked:
# Add debug logging
echo "DEBUG: DAG spawn invoked" >> /tmp/debug.log
# Trigger feature
uv run python -m my_feature
# Verify infrastructure was called
cat /tmp/debug.log
Search for orphaned implementations:
# Find functions defined but never called
ast-grep --pattern 'async function $NAME() { $$$ }' | \
xargs -I {} grep -r "{}" src/
Before declaring infrastructure complete:
Wrong approach:
✓ Built BeadsTaskGraph class
✓ Implemented DAG dependencies
✓ Added spawn logic
✗ Never wired - Task tool still runs instead
✗ Used SQLite instead of PostgreSQL
Right approach:
✓ Built BeadsTaskGraph class
✓ Wired into Task tool execution path
✓ Verified claude -p spawn is called
✓ Confirmed PostgreSQL backend in use
✓ Tested: user calls Task() → DAG spawns → beads execute
✓ No parallel implementations found
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Prerequisites
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
parcadei/continuous-claude-v3
mattpocock/skills
cursor/plugins
ailabs-393/ai-labs-claude-skills
pproenca/dot-skills
mattpocock/skills
completion-check has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
I recommend completion-check for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
completion-check fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: completion-check is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
completion-check has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
completion-check has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: completion-check is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: completion-check is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
completion-check is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
Keeps context tight: completion-check is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
showing 1-10 of 48