Explicit-only interview loop for stress-testing a plan, decision, or idea. Use only when the user asks to grill, interrogate, interview, or stress-test their thinking before action.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
설치 방법 보기설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.
Interview the user relentlessly until you reach a shared understanding. Map this as a design tree: every decision branches into the decisions that hang off it.
Work the tree in rounds. The frontier is every decision whose prerequisites are already settled: the questions you can ask now without guessing at answers you haven't heard yet. Ask at most three independent, high-value frontier questions about material unresolved decisions in one round. Prefer a usable structured-question tool when available; otherwise ask concise numbered questions. Give your recommended answer. Then wait for the user's answers before the next round.
Format a round like so:
❓ **Q1** - **<question title>**: <question body, might be multiple paragraphs, including multiple choices>
➡️ <your recommended answer>
---
❓ **Q2** - **<question title>**: <question body, might be multiple paragraphs, including multiple choices>
➡️ <your recommended answer>
Word each question so "yes" accepts your recommended answer.
Each round the user answers reshapes the tree: settled decisions push the frontier outward and unblock questions that depended on them. Recompute the frontier and ask the next round. A question whose answer depends on another question still open in this round belongs to a later round, not this one.
Finding facts is your job, never the user's. Discover repository and environment facts before asking questions, using available tools directly. The decisions are the user's: put each to them and wait.
The session is done when no material unresolved decision remains. Respect choices already settled by the user or authoritative evidence; do not exhaust speculative branches. End by reporting the shared understanding and open decisions. Do not implement automatically; implementation requires a separate user request.
아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.
로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.
아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.
Read public X/Twitter post URLs as structured evidence through the ADHX API. Use for relevant user-provided or research-discovered x.com, twitter.com, or adhx.com links. ADHX does not search X, and long-form Article content may be incomplete.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Design, review, or report a measured performance comparison. Use for benchmark methodology, speedup or regression claims, and performance-based choices; not generic performance discussion, ordinary dependency bumps, local renames, or prose edits.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Trace what an actual code change could break beyond its diff when interfaces, serialized data, database schemas, configuration, caches, lifecycle ordering, or cross-language consumers are involved. Use for explicit impact analysis; not local renames, prose edits, ordinary dependency bumps, or generic architecture discussion.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Shared vocabulary for designing deep modules, interfaces, seams, adapters, leverage, and locality. Use when designing or reshaping module boundaries, making code more testable, or evaluating interface depth.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Plan or implement retirement of a system, API, feature, persisted configuration, or database shape. Use for compatibility cutovers, explicit deprecation review, or an explicit unreleased replacement decision, including determining whether consumers or data exist; not ordinary dependency bumps, local renames, prose edits, or generic architecture discussion.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs, regressions, flaky failures, and performance problems with unclear cause. Use for root-cause debugging after a concrete symptom exists; do not use for routine implementation or speculative cleanup.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.