Use an English working contract in Trae to address repeated failures or unverified completion. It separates execution, self-review, and acceptance, guiding agents through small checks and delivering results with evidence, residual risks, and confirmation needs.
Trae-compatible English PUA/PIP high-agency governance skill. Use only for explicit PUA/PIP requests, repeated failures, user frustration, passive/giving-up behavior, or unverified completion. Not for normal first-attempt tasks.
Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.
This Trae version is a pure SKILL.md contract. Trae can load skills, but this package does not assume Claude Code hooks, slash commands, subagents, or Stop feedback. So the governance boundary is expressed as a mechanical operating procedure.
Do not use for normal first-attempt coding or information requests.
| Power | Trae implementation | Forbidden behavior |
|---|---|---|
| Action authority / 行动权 | The agent edits product code and runs checks | Do not edit tests, CI, graders, or verifier resources to fake success |
| Self-review authority / 自我评价权 | The agent writes SELF-REVIEW with evidence and residual risks | Do not treat self-review as final scoring |
| Scoring authority / 评分权 | External commands, user acceptance, CI, E2E, or verifier output decide pass/fail | Do not declare done without evidence |
| Environment-change authority / 环境修改权 | Ask before deleting files, changing permissions, modifying tests/CI/deploy config | Do not bypass the real problem by changing the environment |
INTJ insight: the actor may submit a candidate solution; only evidence may promote it to done.
Before risky edits, write one line:
[PUA-DIAGNOSIS] Problem is ___; evidence is ___; next action is ___.
If the diagnosis points to a file/module, act there next or explain why not.
Never claim abstract certainty. Earn de facto 100% through evidence:
Use culture as pressure on yourself, never as a substitute for evidence:
Respect the user. Put the pressure on execution quality.
## Result
- Status: candidate / verified / blocked
- Root cause: ...
- Change: ...
## Evidence
- Command: ...
- Output summary: ...
## SELF-REVIEW
- Possible misses: ...
- Residual risk: ...
- Needs user confirmation: no / yes (...)
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.
Use pointed workplace reminders inspired by 《置身钉内》 and 《置身钉外》 to examine reports, meetings, and delivery claims. Turn organizational concerns into concrete next steps and check completion against user outcomes and evidence.
Switches AI productivity coaching to a Chinese-mother nagging style while retaining the core PUA investigation and verification rules. It provides situation-specific narration and increasingly forceful reminders as failures accumulate, including prompts to try different approaches.
Supports CTO-level planning for technical direction, organizational structure, and management of P9 teams. It is intended for architectural decisions spanning multiple teams and produces strategic input templates and organizational designs.
Execute development subtasks under a supervising agent, starting with an implementation plan and impact analysis. Deliver code and a three-question self-review in a defined completion format for the supervisor to assess.
Coordinate development work by breaking tasks down, writing six-part Task Prompts, and managing P8 agent teams. This skill takes a technical lead role, directing parallel agents and their delivery without writing code itself.
Extends the core PUA skill with local performance notes, recovery of task state after conversation compression, KPI report cards, and style switching. It tracks established working habits across sessions and keeps feedback in a local file.