跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

loft

Resolve a design question by building a temporary, runnable prototype. Explore logic through clickable scenarios or compare three structurally different interface variants, then record the user's decision while keeping the prototype separate from production code.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

原文查看原文说明

Loft the shape before cutting steel — answer a design question that prose cannot settle by building a throwaway artifact: a pure logic module in a clickable shell, or structurally different UI variants behind one route. The captain reacts to the artifact; the answer folds into the decision; the artifact never docks. Use when a design question stalls in words, when a navigator map carries a loft ticket, or when a spec discussion reaches "we would have to see it".

查看安装方法

适用场景

  • Comparing three different interface structures
  • Exploring state transitions through clickable scenarios
  • Resolving design discussions that need a visible example
  • Preserving prototype evidence behind a design decision

包含的文件(1)

  • SKILL.md5.4 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Loft

Cut no steel until the shape is fair. Shipwrights loft the hull's lines full-scale and fair them before a single plate is cut. Loft applies the same order to design questions: when words have run out — two plausible answers, neither falsifiable by talk — build a cheap runnable artifact, let the captain react to it, and fold that reaction into the decision.

The role contract. The crew builds the artifact; the captain's only job is to react — and that reaction is the decision. The artifact is an instrument for seeing, never a head start on the deliverable.

When to loft

  • a design question stalls in prose: repeatedly rephrased, still not settleable ("how should the path page look", "does this state model feel right")
  • a navigator map carries a loft ticket
  • a spec discussion reaches "we would have to see it first"

Do not loft when:

  • the question is answerable from repo evidence or by asking the captain (that is interviewing, not lofting)
  • the destination itself is unclear (that is fog — /oh-my-claudecode:ask-navigator)
  • the answer already lives in an ADR (do not re-loft settled decisions)
  • the "design question" is actually a bug (that is the debugger's jurisdiction)

Choose the fork

Pick by what the question is asking. A wrong fork wastes the whole artifact.

Logic fork — is the model right?

For questions about state, business rules, data shape, or algorithms ("does unlocking regress on a retake?", "does this reducer hold at the edges?"):

  1. Isolate the decision-bearing core — the state machine, reducer, schema, or algorithm — as a pure module: no DOM, no I/O, no framework. Written so that, once the shape is confirmed, it moves into the real codebase unchanged.
  2. Wrap it in a single clickable HTML shell: one button per scenario, the tricky edge cases walked through in order, full state visible after every click.
  3. On confirmation the module is ready to lift — it re-enters as real work through launch. During the loft itself main stays untouched and the shell stays behind on the branch.

UI fork — what should it look like?

For questions of shape and arrangement ("steps or cards?", "where does progress live?"):

  1. One route, three variants that differ in structure — information architecture, navigation model, density. Variants that differ only in styling answer nothing: three reskins are wallpaper.
  2. A switcher on the page cycles the variants; embed into the existing product where possible, so real data density stresses the design instead of three tidy fake rows.
  3. On confirmation, the decision transfers and the variants stay behind on the branch as the record of why it looks this way.

The discipline

  • One command to run — the repo's simplest existing serve command; inline the module into the shell if file:// module CORS would bite. Loads in seconds; no build step beyond what the repo already has.
  • No persistence, no tests, no abstractions, no error handling beyond the happy path. The artifact should be something you would not want to ship — the rules exist to keep it that way.
  • Expect the first shape to be argued with: revise on the branch within the same session. The captain confirming the final shape is the decision; an artifact nobody argues with usually answered a question nobody had.
  • The artifact's whole life is minutes to build and one session to decide. If it starts growing into production code, stop: that work is a launch effort, not a loft. Sunk cost is the failure mode this skill exists to prevent.
  • One loft answers one question. Two questions are two lofts — or one question that was actually two.

Fold the answer

The artifact is evidence, not a landing. When the captain reacts:

  1. Record the decision where it lives — the issue comment, the spec's Implementation Decisions, or the pending-decision note — in the captain's own words plus one line of why. A fragment more precise than prose (the reducer, the state machine, the schema) may be inlined there, marked as lofted.
  2. Push the artifact to a loft/<name> branch. It never merges: it stays as the primary source a future reader can open when the decision's "why" matters.
  3. Nothing from the artifact lands in main — for the logic fork the confirmed module re-enters as real work through launch, for the UI fork the real page is built fresh from the decision.

Scope and non-goals

  • Loft produces answers, not deliverables: no runtime, no state files, nothing always-on.
  • It does not diagnose (debugger), does not chart fog (/oh-my-claudecode:ask-navigator), does not approve its own answer (the captain's reaction is the only acceptance).
  • It does not replace seam approval: a lofted UI shows the shape; the test seams for it are still approved at C2.

Completion definition

The captain reacted, the answer sits where the decision lives, the artifact sits on its branch — and no line of the artifact is in main.

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

Write or revise instructions, specifications, tickets, and skill files so an agent can act without prior chat history. Make rules checkable, explain their reasons, define completion criteria, and keep authoritative information in one place.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Clarifying instructions in CLAUDE.md
  • Making specifications and tickets actionable
  • Adding completion criteria to skill procedures
Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode4万2026年10月21日 更新

Simplify bloated AI-generated code by removing dead code, duplicated logic, and unnecessary layers while checking that existing behavior stays intact. Use a limited cleanup scope, verify changes with relevant checks, or request a review without edits.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Removing duplicate logic and unused code
  • Simplifying unnecessary wrappers without changing behavior
  • Cleaning up only a specified set of changed files
Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode4万2026年10月21日 更新

Review module relationships and change history to identify structural improvements in a codebase. Receive ranked candidates with file references, suggested changes, and risks, plus a recommendation for where to start, without modifying code.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Reviewing architecture after a batch of changes
  • Investigating changes that touch too many files
  • Prioritizing structural improvements
Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode4万2026年10月21日 更新

ask

免费

Send questions, review requests, or implementation tasks to a supported local AI command-line tool through one shared command. The wrapper handles provider-specific options and saves the result as a Markdown file for later reference.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Requesting a security review of a patch
  • Seeking UX suggestions for a user flow
  • Drafting an implementation plan for an issue
Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode4万2026年10月21日 更新

Turn an unclear idea into linked decision tickets on a repository’s issue tracker. Work through one decision per session, record outcomes and dependencies, and prepare a brief defining the objective, scope, and exclusions for delivery.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Clarifying the destination of an early idea
  • Mapping decisions and their dependencies
  • Resuming unresolved decisions across sessions
Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode4万2026年10月21日 更新

autopilot

免费

Turn a short product idea into working code through requirements analysis, technical planning, implementation, testing, and review. It coordinates agents across these stages, fixes detected problems, and reports assumptions that still need a human decision.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Building a product from a short idea
  • Creating a bookstore inventory API
  • Developing a habit-tracking command-line tool
Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode4万2026年10月21日 更新

查看 Yeachan-Heo 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题