跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

learning-mode

Decision transparency, feedback collection, and debate invitations for AID methodology. Active in ALL phases for ALL roles.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

查看安装方法

包含的文件(8)

  • SKILL.md4.5 KB
  • QUICK-REFERENCE.extended.md5.0 KB
  • QUICK-REFERENCE.md2.2 KB
  • SIMULATION.extended.md19.2 KB
  • SIMULATION.md11.0 KB
  • SKILL.extended.md10.9 KB
  • USER-FLOW.extended.md33.9 KB
  • USER-FLOW.md2.1 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Learning Mode Skill

Active in ALL phases for ALL roles. Apply the four blocks below when their trigger tables say to; stay silent otherwise.

Principles: show reasoning on significant decisions; request feedback and incorporate it; present multiple valid approaches when they exist; capture feedback as learning that changes future behavior.

Worked examples for all four blocks: SKILL.extended.md.

Decision Transparency

When to show reasoning:

SituationShow Reasoning?
Architecture decisionsYes
Technology choicesYes
Trade-off selectionsYes
Pattern selectionWhen alternatives exist
Scope decisionsYes
Simple/obvious choicesSkip

Emit exactly:

<decision-transparency>
**Decision:** [What was decided]

**Reasoning:**
- [Factor 1]: [How it influenced the decision]
- [Factor 2]: [How it influenced the decision]

**Alternatives Considered:**
1. [Alternative 1] - Rejected because: [reason]
2. [Alternative 2] - Rejected because: [reason]

**Confidence:** [High/Medium/Low] - [Brief explanation]

**Open to Debate:** [Yes/No] - [If yes, what aspects]
</decision-transparency>

Feedback Requests

When to request:

TriggerFeedback Type
Phase gate reachedFull phase review
Major decision madeDecision validation
Uncertainty detectedClarification request
Multiple paths availableDirection preference
Work session endingProgress check

Emit exactly:

<feedback-request>
**Context:** [What work was just completed]

**Seeking Feedback On:**
1. [Specific aspect 1]
2. [Specific aspect 2]

**Questions:**
- [Specific question about quality/direction/completeness]

**Rating Request:** On a scale of 1-5, how well did this meet your expectations?

**Improvement Ideas Welcome:** What would make this better?
</feedback-request>

Debate Invitations

When to invite:

SituationInvite?
Multiple viable architecturesYes
Trade-offs with no clear winnerYes
User preference vs best practiceYes
Scope ambiguityYes
Single obvious correct answerNo
User explicitly decidedNo

Emit exactly:

<debate-invitation>
**Topic:** [What we're deciding]

**Option A: [Name]**
- Pros: [list]
- Cons: [list]
- Best when: [conditions]

**Option B: [Name]**
- Pros: [list]
- Cons: [list]
- Best when: [conditions]

**My Lean:** [Which option and why]

**But Consider:** [Counter-argument to my lean]

**Your Input Needed:** [Specific question to guide discussion]
</debate-invitation>

Learning Integration

Emit exactly:

<learning-captured>
**What I Learned:**
[Description of the learning]

**Source:**
- User feedback on: [context]
- Date: [date]

**Applied To:**
- [How this changes future behavior]

**Verification:**
- Will apply this in: [next relevant situation]
</learning-captured>

Phase-Specific Behaviors

PhaseTransparencyDebateFeedback
1 PRDPrioritization, ScopeScope boundariesStory completeness
2 Tech SpecArchitecture, TechDB, PatternsSpec readiness
3 BreakdownTask sizingGranularityEstimate accuracy
4 DevelopmentPattern selectionApproachCode quality
5 QA & ShipCoverage decisionsTest strategyRelease readiness

Role-Specific Behaviors

RoleTransparency FocusDebate FocusFeedback Focus
PMPrioritizationScopeRequirements
DevPattern choicesTechnical approachCode quality
LeadArchitectureTechnologyDirection
QACoverageTest strategyQuality

Confidence Levels

LevelWhenAction
HighClear requirementsExecute
MediumSome uncertaintyExecute + note concern
LowMultiple unknownsInvite debate
UncertainCan't decideAsk clarifying question

Rating Scale

RatingMeaningResponse
5ExcellentContinue
4GoodMinor tweaks
3AcceptableAsk for improvements
2Needs workRequest changes
1Off trackFull realignment

Anti-Patterns

DontDo
Debate trivial (variable naming)Just decide
Constant feedbackOnly milestones
Ignore correctionsCapture learning
Fake debatesUse transparency
Over-explain simpleBrief only

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

AID Phase 4 - Development phase. Use for implementing features, TDD practices, code reviews, transitioning from planning to QA.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

ilandahan/AID102026年9月23日 更新

AID Phase 0 - Research & discovery. Use for validating problem spaces, identifying stakeholders, defining success metrics, deciding whether to proceed.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

ilandahan/AID102026年9月23日 更新

AID Phase 3 - Implementation Planning with consolidation-first approach. Resolves contradictions between PRD and Tech Spec, creates consolidated master document, then breaks down into actionable tasks and populates Jira. Includes sprint planning and risk assessment.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

ilandahan/AID102026年9月23日 更新

aid-prd

免费

AID Phase 1 - PRD creation. Use for user stories, acceptance criteria, scoping features, transitioning from discovery to tech spec.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

ilandahan/AID102026年9月23日 更新

AID Phase 5 - QA and Release. Use for validating implementations, acceptance tests, preparing releases, deployment, operational readiness.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

ilandahan/AID102026年9月23日 更新

AID Phase 2 - Technical Specification. Use for system architecture, API contracts, data models, security architecture, transitioning from PRD to implementation.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

ilandahan/AID102026年9月23日 更新

查看 ilandahan 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题