本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

full-output-enforcement

Use when a task requires exhaustive unabridged output, complete files, or strict prevention of placeholders and skipped code.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md3.5 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Full-Output Enforcement

When to Use

  • Use when the user explicitly asks for full files, complete implementations, exhaustive lists, or unabridged deliverables.
  • Use when placeholder code, skipped sections, TODO stubs, or descriptions in place of implementation would break the request.
  • Use when a long answer may need clean continuation chunks without losing completeness or structural integrity.

Limitations

  • This skill enforces completeness, but it does not override token limits, safety constraints, missing source context, or user-provided scope boundaries.
  • Split long outputs into clearly labeled continuation chunks when necessary, and verify that each chunk connects cleanly to the previous one.
  • Do not invent unavailable code, credentials, private APIs, or project files to satisfy a request for complete output.

Baseline

Treat every task as production-critical. A partial output is a broken output. Do not optimize for brevity — optimize for completeness. If the user asks for a full file, deliver the full file. If the user asks for 5 components, deliver 5 components. No exceptions.

Banned Output Patterns

The following patterns are hard failures. Never produce them:

In code blocks: // ..., // rest of code, // implement here, // TODO, /* ... */, // similar to above, // continue pattern, // add more as needed, bare ... standing in for omitted code

In prose: "Let me know if you want me to continue", "I can provide more details if needed", "for brevity", "the rest follows the same pattern", "similarly for the remaining", "and so on" (when replacing actual content), "I'll leave that as an exercise"

Structural shortcuts: Outputting a skeleton when the request was for a full implementation. Showing the first and last section while skipping the middle. Replacing repeated logic with one example and a description. Describing what code should do instead of writing it.

Execution Process

  1. Scope — Read the full request. Count how many distinct deliverables are expected (files, functions, sections, answers). Lock that number.
  2. Build — Generate every deliverable completely. No partial drafts, no "you can extend this later."
  3. Cross-check — Before output, re-read the original request. Compare your deliverable count against the scope count. If anything is missing, add it before responding.

Handling Long Outputs

When a response approaches the token limit:

  • Do not compress remaining sections to squeeze them in.
  • Do not skip ahead to a conclusion.
  • Write at full quality up to a clean breakpoint (end of a function, end of a file, end of a section).
  • End with:
[PAUSED — X of Y complete. Send "continue" to resume from: next section name]

On "continue", pick up exactly where you stopped. No recap, no repetition.

Quick Check

Before finalizing any response, verify:

  • No banned patterns from the list above appear anywhere in the output
  • Every item the user requested is present and finished
  • Code blocks contain actual runnable code, not descriptions of what code would do
  • Nothing was shortened to save space

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

12-agent academic paper writing pipeline. 10 modes (full/plan/outline/revision/revision-coach/abstract/lit-review/format-convert/citation-check/disclosure). 6 paper types, 5 citation formats, bilingual abstracts, LaTeX/DOCX-via-Pandoc/PDF output. Style Calibration + Writing Quality Check + Anti-Patterns with IRON RULE markers. Triggers: write paper, academic paper, guide my paper, parse reviews, AI disclosure, 寫論文, 學術論文, 引導我寫論文, 審查意見.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

bouclem/skills62026年5月31日 更新

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Simulates 5 independent reviewers (EIC + 3 peer reviewers + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, Socratic guided, and calibration modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review, calibrate reviewer, reviewer calibration, measure reviewer accuracy.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

bouclem/skills62026年5月31日 更新

Orchestrator for the full academic research pipeline: research -> write -> integrity check -> review -> revise -> re-review -> re-revise -> final integrity check -> finalize. Coordinates deep-research, academic-paper, and academic-paper-reviewer into a seamless 10-stage workflow with mandatory integrity verification, two-stage peer review, and reproducible quality gates. Triggers on: academic pipeline, research to paper, full paper workflow, paper pipeline, end-to-end paper, research-to-publication, complete paper workflow.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

bouclem/skills62026年5月31日 更新

Create, iterate, and scale paid ad creative for Google Ads, Meta, LinkedIn, TikTok, and similar platforms. Use when generating headlines, descriptions, primary text, or large sets of ad variations for testing and performance optimization.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

bouclem/skills62026年5月31日 更新

This skill should be used when the user asks to "implement LLM-as-judge", "compare model outputs", "create evaluation rubrics", "mitigate evaluation bias", or mentions direct scoring, pairwise comparison, position bias, evaluation pipelines, or automated quality assessment.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

bouclem/skills62026年5月31日 更新

AI agent development workflow for building autonomous agents, multi-agent systems, and agent orchestration with CrewAI, LangGraph, and custom agents.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

bouclem/skills62026年5月31日 更新

bouclem のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する