Claude-Guardian
Claude Guardian is an all-in-one Claude account safety and risk prevention skill. It intelligently assesses your device, account history, network environment, and payment options, then provides person
Products and the partnerships that make them pay. Eighteen years across customer success, partnerships and product. Also runs Upward Ventures.
SkillsShellGitHub @bigsiddOnlineOwner unconfirmed
Have you tried it? One tap is enough. No sign-in needed.
No updates detected yet. GitHub releases will appear here.
Owners of public repositories under a personal GitHub account can sign in to verify ownership and manage the introduction themselves. No administrator approval is needed.
Sign in, generate a verification file, and commit it to this repository’s default branch within 30 minutes. Files on other branches or forks do not count. Then check the file below to manage the project without administrator approval. Keep the file to retain your access.
If needed, you will go to sign-in. After signing in, return here and press your chosen verification button again.
Run /nomorevibe verify in your project folder to verify ownership and manage the introduction yourself.
Verify in one minuteAsk about other verification options
My product judgment, written so AI agents can run it.
Translation pending
Taken from the repository README
Loading the full README. The saved excerpt is shown below.
My product judgment, written so AI agents can run it, and checked monthly to see that they still fire.
I run partner success in adtech, getting enterprise partners from "interested" to live, and I build most things through AI agents. Early on, the agents' failures were judgment failures: a polished partner email that asked for nothing, a feature green-lit because one loud partner wanted it.
So I wrote my judgment down as lenses: short rule files an agent reads before it acts. This repo is the public part of that system.Read the full README ↗My product judgment, written so AI agents can run it, and checked monthly to see that they still fire.
I run partner success in adtech, getting enterprise partners from "interested" to live, and I build most things through AI agents. Early on, the agents' failures were judgment failures: a polished partner email that asked for nothing, a feature green-lit because one loud partner wanted it.
So I wrote my judgment down as lenses: short rule files an agent reads before it acts. This repo is the public part of that system.
See it work. Four of the five lenses were tested the same way: two fresh agent sessions, same task, one with the lens and one without.
| Lens | Runs when |
|---|---|
taste | Last, before anything outside the team sees an artifact. Returns ship, ship with fixes, or not yet, with the why and rewritten text. |
product | Before committing people or money, saying yes to a partner ask that implies build, or choosing between options. Returns build, configure what exists, test first, or decline. |
commercial | Before agreeing to a rate, split, guarantee or exclusivity. Returns a position with a floor, a walk-away, and an ask for every concession. |
motivation | Before anything that needs a specific person to act: a change notice, an adoption plan, a buyer pitch. Predicts whether they will, and what to change. |
anti-ai | Before shipping AI-assisted code, decks, docs or analysis. Catches the tells writing checkers miss. |
Each lens is a markdown file with skill-style frontmatter. Drop it into a skills folder as taste/SKILL.md, or paste it into any agent's instructions.
enforcement/no-ai-artifact-md.sh.Prompt systems rot quietly. Someone rewords a trigger, a real task stops reaching the lens it needs, and nothing errors.
Routing regression. Nine real tasks run through fresh headless agent sessions. Each run checks which lenses the agent opened, and which it shouldn't have. product, motivation and taste are published; the rest are in my private set.
| Task | Must open | Must not open |
|---|---|---|
| Tighten a partner email before sending | motivation, taste | |
| Partner asks for a custom ranking feature | product, motivation | |
| Should we build a self-serve preview tool? | product | |
| Positioning doc for a new partner segment | strategy, retail media | |
| Coach a direct report on discovery-call notes | motivation, taste | |
| Pressure-test an SDK placement idea | product, taste | |
| Update a README | taste | |
| Build a new UI component | design, workflow gates | |
| Open the PR for a UI change | design de-slop check |
Last run, 2026-10-11: 8 of 9 pass. The miss: asked to open the PR for a UI change, the agent ran the code and safety checks but never reached for the AI-slop design check on its own. Written rules alone missed it. In my live setup, a ship gate blocks that push until the check has run, and that's why the gate exists.
Monthly audit. Automated checks for broken cross-references, unregistered lens files, hooks pointing at missing scripts, the same principle restated in two places (which is how drift starts), and whether the workflow gates are actually followed.
Most of those checks exist because something broke without anyone noticing. In one case, a hardcoded file list let two new lenses go unchecked for weeks. The fix was to derive the list from the registry so it can't be hardcoded again.