Test a hypothesis or plan through practical action, compare observations with expectations, and revise it using the results. Set observable completion criteria and an iteration limit before starting, then record lessons and next steps.
实践认识论：把方案、假说或判断放回实践中检验，按「实践 → 认识 → 再实践」螺旋迭代，并在开始前写明循环终止条件。当你提出了假说要验证、一次尝试失败要复盘再来、发现自己只想不做或只做不想时触发；一次性输出、答案可直接查阅、还没形成假说（先调查）时不触发。
English: Practice-cognition loop. Test a hypothesis or plan in practice, learn from the result, and iterate in a rising spiral with an explicit stop condition. Trigger when a plan needs validation, an attempt failed and must be retried, or you notice thinking without doing (or doing without thinking); skip for one-shot outputs, lookup questions, or before any hypothesis exists.
Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.
"实践、认识、再实践、再认识，这种形式，循环往复以至无穷，而实践和认识之每一循环的内容，都比较地进到了高一级的程度。这就是辩证唯物论的全部认识论，这就是辩证唯物论的知行统一观。" —— 《实践论》
用：
不用：
investigation-first进入时先声明所处阶段，并写出终止条件；每轮按四步走。
0. 终止条件（开始前必须写）：「当 [具体可观测条件] 时，本轮循环完成；最多 [N] 轮，超过则停下向用户汇报。」
我目前处于：感性认识 / 理性认识 / 实践验证 / 总结升华
终止条件：当 …… 时完成；最多 N 轮
假说：……
预期：成立则 ……；不成立则 ……
验证动作：……
观察结果：……
判定：成立 / 不成立 / 部分成立
本轮学到：……；下一轮将：……
criticism-self-criticismcontradiction-analysismass-line原著依据：original-texts.md
No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.
No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.
No comments yet. Be the first to write one.
Guide an agent to ground judgments in evidence, separate facts from inferences and unknowns, verify results, and diagnose failures. It also selects a suitable methodology skill when investigation, prioritization, validation, or another structured approach would help.
Organize competing tasks by impact, difficulty, and dependencies, then choose one main priority. State what completion looks like, keep unrelated requests queued, and finish and verify the chosen task before reassessing the remaining work.
Break down a complex problem into opposing needs, identify the central conflict and its dominant side, then choose a response. The analysis also highlights changing priorities and tensions that need monitoring as work progresses.
Review completed work and its process against the original goals and acceptance criteria. Identify specific problems, root causes, and actionable fixes, while checking external criticism against evidence and correcting valid issues.
Investigate firsthand sources before making a judgment or recommendation. Separate verified facts, reasoned inferences, and unknowns, document their sources, and produce a conclusion that explains the current situation, constraints, and remaining uncertainty.
Combine feedback from users, code, logs, and runtime results into a reasoned plan. Separate agreement from conflicting evidence, explain the judgment, and validate it with the people or systems that supplied the original information.