Portable SKILL.md skills · Claude Code · Cursor · Codex可攜 SKILL.md 技能 · Claude Code · Cursor · Codex

Agent skills that write Traditional Chinese like a real person寫出像真人正體中文的 agent 技能

Straight from my ~/.skills — the portable SKILL.md skills, scripts, and tooling I actually use day to day on Claude Code, Cursor, and Codex. A personal toolbox with open scope; today it leans toward Traditional Chinese writing: de-AI editing, Taiwan localization, and business docs.直接來自我的 ~/.skills,是我日常在 Claude Code、Cursor、Codex 上真的在用的 SKILL.md 技能、腳本與工具。範圍開放的個人工具箱,目前偏向繁體中文寫作:去 AI 味、台灣在地化、商務公文。

npx skills add https://github.com/leoluyi/skills -g -a '*' -y
26Skills個技能
7Categories分類
3Agents supported支援平台
MITOpen source開源授權

Why these exist為什麼有這些

Most AI-writing tooling assumes English. For a Taiwan audience it leaves gaps these skills close.市面上的 AI 寫作工具幾乎都預設英文。對台灣讀者來說,它們留下的缺口正是這些技能要補的。

English-only defaults只顧英文

De-AI editors and style tools are tuned for English and miss the tells in Chinese entirely.去 AI 味、風格工具都對著英文調校,完全抓不到中文裡的破綻。

Generic zh, not Taiwan zh通用中文,不是台灣中文

"Chinese" support usually means mainland usage. These write the way people actually write in Taiwan.所謂的「中文」支援通常是大陸用法。這些技能照台灣人實際的寫法寫。

Leaked mainland wording & Simplified混進來的陸用語與簡體

陸用語, 互聯網黑話, and stray 簡體字 get caught — without over-correcting real terms.陸用語、互聯網黑話、殘留簡體字都抓得出來,又不誤傷真正的術語。

AI tells & corporate jargonAI 味與職場黑話

The uniform rhythm, hedging, and filler that give machine text away — stripped, in both languages.那種一致的節奏、模稜兩可和填充語,中英文都一起清掉。

Skill catalog技能目錄

Every skill is labelled model-invoked (the agent fires it automatically on a matching task, and you can also call it by name) or user-invoked (only you can, by name). Search or filter by category and invocation.每個技能都標了叫用方式:model-invoked(任務命中 trigger 時 agent 會自動載入,也能自己指名叫)或 user-invoked(只有你能指名叫)。可用搜尋或依分類、叫用方式篩選。

Traditional Chinese Writing繁中寫作

Clean AI tells, mainland-China wording, and jargon, or draft a blog from scratch, so Traditional Chinese reads like a person wrote it.去掉 AI 味、陸用語和術語黑話,或從零寫出一篇部落格,讓繁體中文讀起來像真人寫的。

Humanizer (English + zh-TW)去除 AI 味(中英雙語) humanizer-zh

EN繁中中英Model-invoked模型叫用

Catches the tells that make English and Traditional Chinese read as machine-written, then rewrites them into human prose揪出讓中英文讀起來像機器寫的破綻,改回像人講話的樣子

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it as a final de-AI pass before shipping a README, ADR, blog post, or any English/Chinese draft that reads machine-generated.在 README、ADR、部落格或任何中英文草稿出稿前,當作去 AI 味的最後一關。

When not to何時不要

Skip it when you need to compose a piece or give it a human voice from scratch, which is blog-writing-zh's job; this skill removes tells but does not create voice.若要從零寫文章或替它注入個人聲音,改用 blog-writing-zh;本 skill 只除味,不造聲音。

Highlights重點

  • Three finished-prose modes plus a default pre-draft handoff for unparameterized invocations三種成稿模式:改寫、只標記、直接改檔;無參數啟動時預設走前置寫作 handoff
  • One rule set, 47 rules in 8 classes: 34 work in both Chinese and English, 13 are Chinese-specific同一套規則八大類 47 條:34 條中英通用,13 條中文專有
  • Locks a 保護清單 first — prices, quotes, commitments and the author's own rough edges survive verbatim動筆前先鎖保護清單:價格、原話、承諾條款與作者的手工痕跡逐字保留
  • Detect-only 作者隱身 audit names what a soulless draft is missing, not just bad phrases偵測模式點出草稿缺什麼,不只挑錯句
  • Signals not proof: tuned against false positives on non-native and technical writing只當訊號不當判決,避免誤傷非母語與技術寫作
#de-ai#traditional-chinese#ai-isms#zh-tw#editing#readme

Cross-Strait Chinese Localizer台灣正體中文在地化 avoid-china-writing

繁中Model-invoked模型叫用

Strips mainland-China wording, jargon, and leaked Simplified from Traditional Chinese and rewrites it into natural Taiwan usage without over-correcting real terms把混進來的陸用語、簡體字和互聯網黑話,改回台灣讀者習慣的正體中文,又不誤傷真正的術語

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when a Traditional Chinese draft carries mainland wording, corp-speak, or leaked Simplified characters and you need it to read naturally for a Taiwan audience.當一份繁體中文稿子夾雜陸用語、互聯網黑話或簡體字,要改成台灣讀者自然的正體中文時使用。

When not to何時不要

Not for stripping AI tells or polishing tone (use humanizer-zh), formal business docs (formal-doc-structure), RFPs (rfp-writing), or plain-language rewrites (plain-speak).不要用於去 AI 味或潤飾語氣(用 humanizer-zh)、簽呈報告(用 formal-doc-structure)、RFP(用 rfp-writing)或白話翻譯(用 plain-speak)。

Highlights重點

  • Catches 陸用語 across four axes: vocabulary, corp-speak jargon, leaked Simplified, transliterations四軸偵測:詞彙、職場黑話、簡體殘留、音譯專名
  • Three modes: detect-only audit, full rewrite, or in-place file edit三種模式:只標不改、整段改寫、直接改檔案
  • Ranks findings P0-P2 so you fix the loudest mainland-source giveaways firstP0–P2 分級,先改最明顯的陸源破綻
  • Protects brand names, quotes, code, and genuine terms-of-art from over-correction品牌名、引文、程式碼與術語自動保留不誤改
#traditional-chinese#taiwan-localization#cross-strait#zh-tw#simplified-chinese#de-jargon

Plain Speak: Jargon into Plain Language把技術術語翻成白話 plain-speak

繁中ENModel-invoked模型叫用

Turn a technical term, snippet, or dense paragraph into one line your PM, exec, or customer can actually repeat back把術語、程式碼、工程長文翻成非技術主管聽得懂、還能複述的一句話

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when you need to explain a technical term, code snippet, error, or dense engineering text to a non-technical reader, to check whether a plain-language draft actually lands, or to have the answer or question you just got re-done in plain language.當你要把技術術語、程式碼、錯誤訊息或工程長文講給非技術讀者聽,想檢查白話草稿夠不夠白,或想叫它把剛剛那個回答、那個問題用白話重講一次時使用。

When not to何時不要

Not for de-AI voice cleanup (humanizer-zh), structuring a whole formal doc like a 簽呈 or 報告 (formal-doc-structure), or an RFP (rfp-writing).不要用於潤飾語氣、去 AI 味(用 humanizer-zh),編排整份簽呈或報告(用 formal-doc-structure),或 RFP(用 rfp-writing)。

Highlights重點

  • Pins the exact reader first: a CFO gets 財務影響, a salesperson gets 客戶好處先鎖定讀者:CFO 談財務、業務談客戶好處,同一術語講法不同
  • Delivers one repeat-test line: what it does and what it's for, no jargon產出一句能複述的話:做什麼、為什麼,不靠術語解術語
  • Reviews an existing draft against a 10-point checklist, marking each pass/fail可審既有白話草稿,十項檢查逐條標 pass/fail
  • Glosses terms inline (idempotent 冪等) and cuts empty modifiers like 大幅優化就地標註術語(冪等),砍掉「大幅優化」這類空話
  • Invoked bare mid-conversation, re-does the last answer — or re-poses the last question, option by option — in plain language對話中間空手呼叫,直接把上一個回答降白;上一輪是選擇題就逐項白話重問一次
#plain-language#traditional-chinese#jargon-translation#audience-translation#zh-tw#explain-to-pm

Traditional Chinese Blog Writer繁中部落格寫作 blog-writing-zh

繁中User-invoked使用者叫用

Turn notes, a talk, or a bare topic into a Taiwan-Chinese blog post that reads like a real person wrote it把筆記、演講或一個題目,寫成有立場、有親身經歷、讀起來像真人的繁中部落格文

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

When you need to write or rewrite a Taiwan-Chinese blog post or newsletter, or turn Obsidian notes, talks, or foreign articles into a long-form zh-TW piece.要寫或改寫繁中部落格文、電子報,或把 Obsidian 筆記、演講、外文文章變成中文長文時。

When not to何時不要

Not for formal memos (formal-doc-structure), RFPs (rfp-writing), explaining a single term in plain language (plain-speak), or pure de-AI cleanup with no restructuring (humanizer-zh).正式簽呈用 formal-doc-structure、RFP 用 rfp-writing、單一術語白話解釋用 plain-speak、純去 AI 味不動結構用 humanizer-zh。

Highlights重點

  • Two modes: compose from a topic, or rewrite Obsidian notes, talks, and foreign sources兩種模式:從題目開寫,或改寫筆記、演講、外文來源
  • Voice recipes modeled on 7 studied Taiwan and English blogs, tuned by reader and goal風味配方取樣自七個台灣與英文部落格,依讀者與目的調整
  • Length tiers, dual-draft merge for high-stakes pieces, and auto series-split suggestions長度分檔、雙稿熔接、自動評估要不要拆成系列
  • Ships the article plus 3-5 title/subtitle options, then runs a de-AI finishing pass成品一定附 3-5 組標題副標,並跑一輪去 AI 味收尾
#traditional-chinese#blog-writing#zh-tw#de-ai#newsletter#voice

Taiwan Business Documents台灣商務公文

Draft and review 簽呈, meeting records, assessment reports, RFPs, and briefing outlines in Taiwan corporate Traditional Chinese.用台灣職場慣用的正體中文撰寫與審查簽呈、會議紀錄、評估報告、RFP 與說明提綱。

Briefing Outline說明提綱 briefing-outline

繁中Model-invoked模型叫用

Distill one long report or many docs into a high-altitude 說明提綱 a manager can grasp, then drill into把厚重的來源文件收斂成一份高空俯瞰的說明提綱,讓主管一眼掌握全貌、需要時再往下鑽

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when you need to condense one or more source documents into a navigable briefing a manager or committee can grasp at a glance and drill into.當你要把一份或多份來源文件收斂成主管或委員會能一眼掌握、又能往下鑽的說明提綱時使用。

When not to何時不要

Not for authoring a single formal doc from scratch (use formal-doc-structure), an RFP (rfp-writing), lowering one term to a lay reader (plain-speak), or pure de-AI cleanup (humanizer-zh).不要用於從零撰寫單一正式文件(用 formal-doc-structure)、RFP(用 rfp-writing)、白話化單一術語(用 plain-speak)或純去 AI 味(用 humanizer-zh)。

Highlights重點

  • Handles one long report or many docs: each part gets its essence, then points down for detail跨多份文件或一份長報告,每段給足精華再往下指路
  • Cuts detail that belongs in the source (SOP, 逐條標準, 配分) so the outline stays stable when sources churn把逐條標準、SOP、逐項配分等細節下沉回來源,提綱穩定不亂
  • MECE spine: every source maps to exactly one section, no overlap, full coverageMECE 骨架:每份來源只落在一個章節,不重不漏
  • Re-sync mode re-runs only the sections whose source docs changed來源改版時,只重跑受影響的章節
#briefing-outline#traditional-chinese#executive-summary#document-distillation#taiwan-business#mece

Formal Internal Doc Structure正式公文結構 formal-doc-structure

繁中User-invoked使用者叫用

Turns a rough ask into a ready-to-circulate 簽呈, 會議紀錄, or 評估報告 with the structure its reader actually needs把粗略需求變成可直接送簽的簽呈、會議紀錄或評估報告,結構跟著讀者的決策需求走

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it to write or fix an internal business document in Taiwan corporate Traditional Chinese: approval memo, meeting record, assessment report, project plan, or vendor communication.要撰寫或修整公司內部的簽呈、會議紀錄、評估報告、專案規劃或廠商溝通文件時用它。

When not to何時不要

Not for RFPs or bidding specs (use rfp-writing), pure language cleanup with no restructuring (use humanizer-zh), or blog posts and marketing copy.不要用在 RFP 或招標規格(改用 rfp-writing)、只做語言去 AI 味不動結構(改用 humanizer-zh),或部落格與行銷文案。

Highlights重點

  • Maps five reader needs (approve, assess, record, execute, coordinate) to a matching document template依五種讀者需求(核准、評估、紀錄、執行、協調)套對應的文件範本
  • Outputs a paste-ready draft with real sections, not a critique or an outline直接產出可貼進文件的完整段落,不是給建議或列大綱
  • Forces concrete owners, timelines, deliverables, and acceptance criteria into every activity每項工作都要寫清楚負責單位、時程、交付物與驗收方式
  • Runs a 10-point revision checklist plus an optional de-AI finishing pass before final output收尾跑十點修訂檢查,並可選配去 AI 味的最後一道潤稿
#traditional-chinese#taiwan#meeting-minutes#approval-memo#assessment-report#business-docs

Technical RFP Writing & Review技術 RFP 撰寫與審查 rfp-writing

繁中User-invoked使用者叫用

Draft and review technical RFPs from the issuer's side, cutting redundant sections, appendix bloat, and AI filler站在招標方立場撰寫與審查技術 RFP,砍掉重複章節、附錄灌水與 AI 填充語

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when you draft or review a technical RFP (需求規格書 / 招標規格) as the issuing organization, not the bidder.當你要以招標方身分撰寫或審查技術 RFP(需求規格書/招標規格)時使用。

When not to何時不要

Skip it for vendor bid responses (投標提案), migration/test plans, ADRs, meeting minutes, or pure de-AI cleanup (use humanizer-zh).投標提案、遷移/測試計畫、ADR、會議紀錄或純去 AI 味潤稿不要用(改用 humanizer-zh)。

Highlights重點

  • Structural audit that fixes misplaced sections, merges thin ones, and kills appendix bloat結構審查:修正錯置章節、合併過薄段落、刪除附錄灌水
  • Pain-point filter deletes requirements already met by general infrastructure痛點過濾:一般基礎設施已涵蓋的需求就刪掉,只留領域專屬項目
  • Language rules force every bullet into a full what/why sentence with section context語言規則:每條需求都寫成說明 what/why 的完整句,段落先給脈絡
  • Strips AI filler (確保, 從而, 賦能) while keeping legitimate RFP notation禁用清單清掉『確保、從而、賦能』等 AI 填充,但保留正規 RFP 寫法
#rfp#procurement#requirement-spec#traditional-chinese#zh-tw#de-ai

Presentation簡報

Work a deck out one node at a time — what it is for, how it is structured, what the titles assert, how it opens, closes and gets delivered, and where the layout costs the room.一次一個節點把一場簡報做出來:這場要幹嘛、架構怎麼排、標題講什麼、開場收尾與表達怎麼走,以及版面在哪裡讓聽眾讀不到。

Deck Consulting簡報顧問 deck-consulting

繁中User-invoked使用者叫用

Advise on a presentation one node at a time — positioning, structure, headlines, storyline, opening, closing, delivery, layout — with current cross-session state and each node's artifact on disk so the next one picks up where it left off像顧問一樣一次做一個節點:溝通定位、骨架定形、主張式標題、敘事編排、破題定錨、收束提請、口說轉譯、逐頁診斷,保留跨 session 狀態與每個節點的檔案產出,下一個節點直接接手

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when you have raw material and a date, and need one part of the deck settled — what it is for, how it is structured, what the titles assert, how it opens and closes, or what the layout is costing the room.當你手上有素材和一個日期,需要把簡報的某一段定下來時使用——這場要達成什麼、架構怎麼排、標題該講什麼、開場收尾怎麼走,或現有版面讓聽眾損失了什麼。

When not to何時不要

Not for producing the .pptx file itself, for designing an infographic (use infographic-design), for stripping AI-writing patterns from Chinese prose (use humanizer-zh), or for writing a 簽呈 or 報告 (use formal-doc-structure).不要用於實際產出 .pptx 檔案、設計資訊圖表(用 infographic-design)、去除中文的 AI 寫作痕跡(用 humanizer-zh),或撰寫簽呈與報告(用 formal-doc-structure)。

Highlights重點

  • Eleven nodes entered one at a time; each loads only its own reference file, so a headline-only session doesn't pay for the other ten十一個節點一次進一個,各自只讀自己的 reference 檔,只想改標題的場次不必付另外十個的成本
  • Each node writes a Markdown artifact under docs/deck-consulting/ that later nodes read instead of restarting from raw material; context.md carries the current cross-session checkpoint and revising one names which downstream artifacts it just made stale每個節點把產出寫成 docs/deck-consulting/ 底下的 Markdown,後面的節點讀前面的產出而不必回頭重讀原始素材;context.md 保存跨 session 最新狀態,改動其中一份時會指名哪些下游檔案因此過期
  • Material premise changes are appended to decision-log.md without turning ordinary Q&A into a transcript重大前提變更追加到 decision-log.md,一般問答不會膨脹成逐字紀錄
  • Soft prerequisites: no node blocks — a missing input is named along with what proceeding without it costs, and you choose軟性前置:沒有節點會擋人——缺少的輸入會被指名,連同「少了它會付什麼代價」一起講清楚,由你決定怎麼走
  • Every claim traces to your material or an answer you gave; a fact the material lacks is marked as a gap instead of invented每一句主張都追溯得回你的素材或你給的答案;素材沒有的事實標成待補,不會編一個看起來合理的出來
  • slidecheck ranks findings by reader cost — 讀不到 / 讀錯 / 讀得慢 — and marks each one 觀察 or 推測 according to what the input could settleslidecheck 依讀者成本排序:讀不到/讀錯/讀得慢,每一則都標明是觀察還是推測,取決於輸入能判到哪裡
#deck-consulting#presentation#slides#storytelling#traditional-chinese#taiwan-business

Deck Writer簡報內容撰寫 deck-writer

EN繁中Model-invoked模型叫用

Turn a topic or source bundle into a complete slide-by-slide Markdown deck with an argument, assertion-style titles, full on-slide copy, evidence notes, and speaker notes把主題或素材寫成完整的逐頁簡報 Markdown,包含論證、主張式標題、投影片內文、來源註記與講者備註

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Use it when you have a topic or source material and need the complete content layer of a presentation written before visual production.當你手上有主題或素材,需要在視覺製作前先把整份簡報的逐頁內容寫完時使用。

When not to何時不要

Not for producing a .pptx or rendered slides, choosing visual styling, diagnosing an existing deck one issue at a time, or writing a long-form report.不用於產出 .pptx 或渲染投影片、決定視覺風格、逐題診斷既有簡報,或撰寫長篇報告。

Highlights重點

  • Begins from audience, outcome, and scale, then turns source material into claims, evidence, comparisons, mechanisms, decisions, and actions先定義受眾、結果與規模,再把素材拆成主張、證據、比較、機制、決策與行動
  • Uses an outline checkpoint only for large or materially ambiguous decks; bounded requests get a complete deck immediately只在大型或關鍵條件未定的簡報先停在大綱檢查點;邊界清楚的請求直接產出完整內容
  • Every slide carries one assertion-style claim plus the content form that best proves or explains it每張投影片只承擔一個主張,並選擇最能證明或解釋它的內容形式
  • Writes a versioned Markdown artifact with stable slide headings, source notes, layout cues, and optional speaker notes產出可升版的 Markdown,保留穩定的 slide heading、來源註記、版面提示與可選講者備註
#deck-writing#presentation#slides#storytelling#markdown#traditional-chinese

Docs & Design文件與設計

Language-agnostic professional tools: save-worthy explanatory graphics in SVG or HTML, and engineering-grade Diátaxis knowledge docs.跨語言的專業工具:讓人想收藏的說明圖表(SVG 或 HTML),以及工程等級的 Diátaxis 知識文件。

Infographic Design資訊圖表設計 infographic-design

繁中ENModel-invoked模型叫用

Design-system-grade explanatory graphics — timelines, comparisons, process diagrams — as clean, self-contained SVG or a single HTML file. Language-agnostic; built to be saved and reshared設計系統級的說明圖表(時間軸、比較、流程圖),輸出成乾淨、可獨立開啟的 SVG 或單一 HTML 檔案。跨語言通用,為收藏轉發而生

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when you need an infographic, one-pager, timeline, comparison, or how-it-works diagram, or a visual recap of something just taught.需要資訊圖表、懶人包、one-pager、時間軸、比較圖或流程圖解,或把剛教完的內容總結成一張圖時使用。

When not to何時不要

Skip it for standalone data charts, dashboards, BI tooling, slide decks, or plain-language term explanations; route those to a dataviz, pptx, or plain-speak flow instead. Also skip it for cheatsheets and quick-reference tables, and for authoring a knowledge document itself (use knowledge-doc-writing).純資料圖表、儀表板、BI 工具、投影片,或只想用白話解釋一個名詞時不要用它,改用 dataviz、pptx 或 plain-speak。速查表、快速查詢表,以及撰寫知識文件本體(用 knowledge-doc-writing)也不要用它。

Highlights重點

  • Plans the graphic and critiques that plan before building, so it isn't a templated default先擬計畫再自我批判,才動手畫,避開樣板感的預設圖
  • Draws palette, layout, and visual metaphor from the subject's own world for a distinctive look配色、版面、視覺隱喻都取材自主題本身,做出獨特風格
  • Three-level text hierarchy plus format-local preflight and rendered-artifact QA三層文字階層加格式前置檢查與成品 QA,抓出爆版、文字被切、對比不足
  • Handles ByteByteGo-style technical explainers and animated HTML learning recaps支援 ByteByteGo 式技術圖解與動畫版學習總結 HTML
#infographic#svg#diagram#visual-communication#bytebytego#traditional-chinese

Knowledge Doc Writing (Diátaxis)Diátaxis 知識文件寫作 knowledge-doc-writing

繁中Model-invoked模型叫用

Engineering-grade knowledge docs on the Diátaxis model — tutorial, how-to, reference, explanation — writing only what the material supports and flagging the gaps honestly. A discipline that travels across domains以 Diátaxis 模型寫工程等級的知識文件(tutorial、how-to、reference、explanation),素材撐得起才寫,缺口據實標出。這套紀律跨領域通用

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

When you want to distill a technical topic you studied or researched into one lasting reference doc split into tutorial, how-to, reference, and explanation.當你想把自學或研究過的技術主題,整理成可長期參考、tutorial/how-to/reference/explanation 四型分離的知識文件時。

When not to何時不要

Not for internal memos or reports (use formal-doc-structure), RFPs (use rfp-writing), blog posts (use blog-writing-zh), or language-only de-AI cleanup (use humanizer-zh).不要用於簽呈/評估報告(用 formal-doc-structure)、RFP(用 rfp-writing)、部落格(用 blog-writing-zh)、或只做語言層去 AI 味(用 humanizer-zh)。

Highlights重點

  • Compass router assigns each material chunk to exactly one of four Diátaxis blockscompass 兩問把每段素材路由到唯一一型區塊
  • Writes only blocks the material supports and lists the rest as gaps, no fabricated filler素材撐得起才寫,撐不起的型明列為缺口,不捏造空殼
  • Four input modes: chat logs, raw sources, from-scratch research, existing-doc rewrites支援四種輸入:對話紀錄、原始資料、從零研究、既有文件改寫
  • Primary-source checks with as-of dating, plus a de-AI pass before shipping強制查一手來源並標 as-of 時效,出稿前做去 AI 味
#diataxis#traditional-chinese#technical-docs#knowledge-base#self-learning#zh-tw

Visual Craft視覺化設計與重繪 visual-craft

繁中ENModel-invoked模型叫用

Create structured visual work from requirements or restyle existing work while preserving requested content從需求建立結構化視覺化作品,或保留指定內容重新設計既有作品

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Use it to create structured visual work from a topic or requirements, or when existing SVG, PPTX, Mermaid source, or image needs a new visual treatment.從主題或需求建立結構化視覺化作品,或替既有 SVG、PPTX、Mermaid 原碼與圖片換視覺風格時使用。

When not to何時不要

Do not infer unsupported system facts, or silently change content that the user asked an edit to preserve.不要捏造需求未提供的系統事實,也不要在 edit 模式默默修改使用者要求保留的內容。

Highlights重點

  • Classifies each request as generate or edit based on how supplied images are meant to be used依圖片用途判定 generate 或 edit,不以是否有附件作為唯一依據
  • Uses a canvas design system for deliberate visual philosophy, composition, rhythm, hierarchy, and refinement以 canvas design system 約束視覺哲學、構圖、節奏、層級與精修
  • Separates role, pen, colour, structure, and media so one layer can change without silently changing another分開角色、筆調、顏色、結構與媒材,換一層不默默改動其他層
  • Preserves source text, node counts, connections, and groups through explicit reconciliation用明確核對保留素材文字、節點數、連線與群組
  • Uses derived colour gates for contrast, grayscale separation, print safety, and category limits以推導出的顏色閘門檢查對比、灰階區隔、列印安全與類別上限
  • Handles SVG and PPTX rendering with fit checks that resize layout instead of truncating labels支援 SVG 與 PPTX,文字塞不下時調整版面而不截斷標籤
#diagram#svg#pptx#architecture-diagram#flowchart#visual-style#traditional-chinese

Fourth-Wall Repair第四面牆修復 fourth-wall-repair

EN繁中User-invoked使用者叫用

Removes prose about the artifact, reading path, page role, and commissioning context while preserving evidence and real instructions移除文件自述、閱讀導引、頁面角色與委託脈絡,同時保留來源引用與實際操作指示

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Invoke it explicitly when a presentation, slidument, report, README, or technical document should state the subject directly instead of talking about itself.簡報、slidument、報告、README 或技術文件應直接陳述主題,不應談論自己時,請明確呼叫此技能。

When not to何時不要

Not for general AI-ism cleanup, voice editing, document restructuring, factual review, or metadata embedded in file formats.不要用於一般去 AI 味、語氣潤飾、文件重整、事實審查,或檔案格式內嵌的 metadata。

Highlights重點

  • Uses a subject test to separate artifact narration from facts that remain true without the document用主題測試區分文件自述與離開文件後仍成立的事實
  • Distinguishes artifact versions and page cues from API versions and RFP evidence區分文件版本、頁面導引與 API 版本、RFP 來源依據
  • Protects runbook instructions, partner requests, citations, legal text, code, and identifiers保留 runbook 操作指示、合作夥伴要求、引用、法規文字、程式碼與識別字
  • Supports detect-only audit, returned rewrites, and narrow in-place cleanup with a before-and-after record支援只稽核、回傳改寫與窄幅直接改檔,並留下修改前後紀錄
#document-editing#meta-information#fourth-wall#technical-writing

Visual Output QA視覺輸出品質檢查 visual-output-qa

繁中ENModel-invoked模型叫用

Review rendered visual artifacts against one fail-closed delivery standard以單一且無法驗證就不放行的標準,檢查視覺成品的實際呈現

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Use after producing or materially editing rendered SVG, HTML, exported graphics, PPTX, PDF, or other fixed-layout visual output.產出或大幅修改 SVG、HTML、匯出圖檔、PPTX、PDF 等固定版面視覺成品後使用。

When not to何時不要

Not for choosing a visual style, writing slide content, or reviewing prose without a rendered artifact.不要用於選擇視覺風格、撰寫投影片內容,或檢查尚未產生實際成品的純文字。

Highlights重點

  • Treats rendered output as truth instead of trusting source geometry or declared styles以實際呈現為準,不直接相信原始幾何或宣告樣式
  • Separates objective reader-harming failures from advisory design judgment分開會傷害讀者的客觀失敗與建議性設計判斷
  • Returns INCOMPLETE when a renderer, font, or geometry capability is missing缺少 renderer、字型或幾何能力時回傳 INCOMPLETE
  • Covers clipping, bounds, font reflow, missing glyphs, collisions, connector clearance, and actual contrast涵蓋裁切、邊界、字型 reflow、缺字、碰撞、連線淨空與實際對比
#visual-qa#svg#html#pptx#pdf#accessibility#rendering

ELI5五歲圖解 eli5

EN繁中Model-invoked模型叫用

Turn any topic into a one-screen HTML picture explainer: big visuals, very few words, no jargon把任何主題變成一頁式 HTML 圖解:畫面大、字少、零術語

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when someone who knows nothing about the topic has to get it in one sitting, and a picture will do what a paragraph won't.當對象完全不懂這個主題、而且要一次看懂時使用——圖能做到的事,段落做不到。

When not to何時不要

Not for readers who already know the domain and want density (that's Infographic Design), and not for simplifying prose that already exists (that's Plain Speak).讀者已經懂這個領域、想要資訊密度時不要用(那是 Infographic Design);已經有現成文字只是要改簡單時也不要用(那是 Plain Speak)。

Highlights重點

  • One idea per explainer — a second idea is a second explainer, no matter how true or interesting it is一份圖解只講一件事——再真、再有趣的第二件事,都該做成第二份
  • One everyday analogy that has to hold end to end; if it breaks halfway, it gets replaced, not patched一個生活比喻要從頭撐到尾;中途破功就換掉,不補丁
  • 3-6 steps, each one picture and one short sentence, and the picture stays readable with the caption removed3 到 6 步,每步一張圖一句話,圖拿掉說明文字也還看得懂
  • Self-contained HTML: inline SVG and CSS, no external fetches, one screen-scroll, fine on a phone單檔 HTML:inline SVG 與 CSS、不外連、一個捲軸看完、手機可讀
  • Closes with an honest note on what was simplified, so a useful lie doesn't become a wrong belief結尾誠實標註哪裡簡化過,讓好懂的比喻不會變成錯誤的認知
#explainer#learning#visual#html#teaching

Knowledge Management知識管理

Learn a concept by being taught and quizzed, then file your own note into an Obsidian vault on PARA structure.先教後考學懂一個概念,再把親手寫的筆記歸檔進 PARA 結構的 Obsidian 筆記庫。

Learn Loop結構化學習迴圈 learn-loop

繁中User-invoked使用者叫用

Get taught and quizzed on a concept, then write the note yourself while it verifies sources and files it into your Obsidian vault先教後考,筆記你親手寫,它負責查證來源、挑洞、歸檔進 Obsidian

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when you want to genuinely learn a new technical concept and crystallize it into a permanent Obsidian note, not just skim an explanation.當你想真正學懂一個新技術概念,並把它結晶成 Obsidian vault 裡的長期筆記時使用。

When not to何時不要

Skip it for reorganizing an already-distilled doc into Diátaxis blocks (use knowledge-doc-writing) or for a quick one-off explanation with no note to keep.不要用於把已 distill 完的文件重整成 Diátaxis 區塊(改用 knowledge-doc-writing),或只想要一次性的口頭解釋。

Highlights重點

  • Teaches from verified primary sources, then quizzes you with retrieval questions從查證過的一手來源開講,再用回想題考你
  • Never ghostwrites your note: you write it from memory while it pokes holes as a skeptic不代寫筆記:你憑記憶寫,它只當懷疑論者挑洞
  • Sorts each note into evergreen vs reference, wiring up wikilinks, MOCs, and frontmatter自動分流 evergreen/reference,接好 wikilink 與 MOC
  • Temp-vault fallback on machines without your vault, packaged to merge back later沒有 vault 的機器改走 temp-vault,打包好之後併回
#obsidian#learning-loop#retrieval-practice#knowledge-management#note-taking#source-verification

Obsidian Vault NotesObsidian 筆記庫 obsidian-vault

中英Model-invoked模型叫用

Search, create, and link notes in an Obsidian vault that stays on PARA / Johnny-Decimal structure and wikilinks在 Obsidian 筆記庫搜尋、新增與串連筆記,維持 PARA 結構

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when you want to find, create, or organize notes in your Obsidian vault.要在 Obsidian 筆記庫裡搜尋、新增或整理筆記時用它。

When not to何時不要

Not for turning notes into a blog post (use blog-writing-zh) or a structured technical doc (use knowledge-doc-writing).不是把筆記寫成部落格(用 blog-writing-zh)或技術文件(用 knowledge-doc-writing)的工具。

Highlights重點

  • Search the whole vault by filename or content, skipping .obsidian internals依檔名或內容搜尋整個筆記庫,略過 .obsidian
  • Create notes in the right PARA / Johnny-Decimal folder with YAML frontmatter在對的資料夾新增筆記,帶好 frontmatter
  • Link notes with [[wikilinks]] and a ## Related section; dangling links are fine用 [[wikilinks]] 串接筆記,空連結也 OK
  • Find every backlink to a note with a single grep一行 grep 找出任何筆記的反向連結
#obsidian#wikilinks#para#johnny-decimal#note-taking#knowledge-management

Discuss With Me陪我想一想 discuss-with-me

EN繁中Model-invoked模型叫用

Think through a question neither of you can answer yet — widen the options, label what's found vs guessed, attack the load-bearing assumptions, and leave a record that says what would overturn it陪你想一個雙方都還沒有答案的問題:先展開選項,標出哪句是查到的、哪句是猜的,再拆掉承重假設,留下一份寫明「什麼會推翻它」的紀錄

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

When the answer is unknown to both you and the model — an open design direction, a bet under real uncertainty, a thin-evidence diagnosis — or when a discussion has been converging and nobody has said what would make it wrong.當這個問題你跟模型都還沒有答案時使用:懸而未決的設計方向、真有不確定性的判斷、證據很薄的診斷;或討論已經越聊越有共識,卻沒人講得出什麼會推翻它。

When not to何時不要

Not when you already have the answer and just need it written up (use knowledge-doc-writing or formal-doc-structure), not for a concept with a settled answer you haven't learned yet (use learn-loop), and not for factual lookups, debugging, or code review.不要用於:答案已經有了只是要寫成文件(用 knowledge-doc-writing 或 formal-doc-structure)、學一個已有標準答案的概念(用 learn-loop)、以及查事實、debug、code review。

Highlights重點

  • Widens to 5-20 options including ones cutting against the drift, then hands you the cut先展開 5–20 個選項,包含跟當下風向相反的,再交給你決定留哪些
  • Marks every load-bearing claim found / inferred / guessed inline, so a smooth paragraph can't launder a guess每個承重句就地標 [已查證]/[推論]/[推測],流暢的段落沒辦法把猜測洗成事實
  • Red-team pass gives each assumption a fails-if, cheapest evidence, kill criterion, and who would know紅隊回合逐條給出「什麼情況下不成立」「最便宜的驗證」「停損線」「誰會知道」
  • Verifies in a fresh context — subagent or new session, ideally another model family — never in the thread that built the conclusion驗證一律換到乾淨脈絡:subagent 或新對話,最好換一個模型家族,不在原討論串裡自己驗自己
  • Writes an open-question record carrying killed options and the strongest case against, not a decision doc產出是「未定問題紀錄」:保留已排除的選項與反方最強論證,不是一份假裝確定的決策文件
  • Invoked bare mid-conversation, it makes the question out of the last answer — what that turn never argued for — and stops when the work you paused can move對話中途直接呼叫、不帶問題,就從上一輪回答裡沒被論證的地方生出題目,討論到你停下的那件工作能往下走為止
#thinking-partner#red-team#assumptions#decision-record#uncertainty#kill-criteria#pre-mortem

Data Recovery資料救援

Pull deleted or lost data back out of an application's own cache before it's evicted for good.在應用程式自身快取被清掉之前,把刪掉或遺失的資料救回來。

Recover a Deleted Claude Conversation救回被刪除的 Claude 對話 recover-deleted-claude-conversation

ENUser-invoked使用者叫用

Pull a deleted Claude Desktop/claude.ai conversation and its artifacts back out of the Chromium cache before it's evicted在 Chromium 快取被清掉之前,把刪除的 Claude Desktop/claude.ai 對話與產出檔案救回來

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Invoke by name right after a conversation was accidentally deleted from Claude Desktop or claude.ai — manual trigger, run it immediately, it's a race against cache eviction.在 Claude Desktop 或 claude.ai 對話被誤刪後立刻手動呼叫 — 這是跟快取清除的賽跑,越快越好。

When not to何時不要

Skip it for ordinary chat-history or export questions, or generic cache-clearing questions unrelated to recovering lost data.一般聊天紀錄/匯出問題,或與救資料無關的一般快取清理問題不要用。

Highlights重點

  • Freeze-then-snapshot ordering protects the cache from eviction before any exploration starts先凍結來源再備份快取,確保還沒開始探索就先保住快取
  • Isolated uv venv for extraction — never touches system Python or other project environments用隔離的 uv venv 做解壓縮,不碰系統 Python 或其他專案環境
  • Uses ccl_chromium_cache specifically, since generic Chromium-cache parsers mis-decode the blockfile framing指定用 ccl_chromium_cache 解析,因為一般 Chromium 快取解析器會解錯 blockfile 的封裝格式
  • Covers both the Desktop app cache and the claude.ai browser cache variant同時涵蓋 Desktop App 快取與 claude.ai 瀏覽器快取兩種情境
#recovery#cache#chromium#claude-desktop#data-loss#forensics

Agent WorkflowAgent 工作流

Decide before you run, then bound the run: lay out every case, get decisions surfaced as choices, turn a plan or a fuzzy task into a goal with machine-checkable done conditions, hand the whole job over, and distil the taste rubric that says what good looks like.先想清楚再跑,跑起來也框得住:把每個案攤開、決策以選項浮上來、把計畫或模糊任務變成有機器可驗完成條件的 goal、整份工作交出去自動跑完,以及蒸餾出定義「好」長什麼樣的品味 rubric。

Plan → Goal計畫轉 Goal plan-to-goal

EN繁中User-invoked使用者叫用

Turn a rough plan into a bounded goal with machine-checkable done conditions, before an autonomous run burns tokens on a vague target在 agent 自己跑起來之前,把粗略的計畫變成有邊界、完成條件機器可驗的 goal,別讓它對著模糊目標燒 token

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when you have a plan — from plan mode or written by hand — and want an agent to execute it unattended without drifting or stopping early.當你手上已有計畫(plan mode 產出或自己寫的),想讓 agent 無人值守跑完、又不要它中途偏掉或提早收工時使用。

When not to何時不要

Not for writing a plan from scratch (that's plan mode itself), and not for a task small enough that one prompt would do — a goal spec is overhead for a one-line typo.不要用於從零規劃(那是 plan mode 的事),也不要用在一個 prompt 就能解決的小任務——為了一行 typo 寫 goal 規格是多餘的。

Highlights重點

  • Two-phase gate: the review is produced and confirmed before any goal exists, so a wrong assumption costs a sentence instead of a whole run兩階段閘門:先產出審視、使用者確認後才有 goal,猜錯的代價是一句話而不是一整輪自動執行
  • Completion conditions must be commands (tests, typecheck, a search returning nothing) — adjectives never enter the goal完成條件必須是可執行的指令(測試、typecheck、搜尋無結果),形容詞不准進 goal
  • Asks only about holes the code can't settle; forks resolved during exploration are stated for confirmation, not re-asked只問程式碼問不出答案的分歧;探索過程已解決的部分改成「說明後請你確認」,不重複打擾
  • Carries do-not constraints forward verbatim and always sets a stop limit, the stop-loss against an unreachable condition把「不要動」的限制原樣帶進 goal,並一定設停損的回合上限,避免條件不可達時空轉
  • Scope discipline at the gate: extras the model proposed stay outside the goal as separate follow-ups閘門處守住範圍:模型自己想到的加碼另列為後續事項,不偷偷塞進 goal
  • Two output routes offered at the same gate: a file with a decision record and a one-line `/goal @file` pointer, or a self-contained skeleton prompt with nothing written to disk同一道閘門給兩條輸出路:落檔留決策記錄、一行 `/goal @檔案` 去貼,或不落檔的骨幹 prompt 直接貼
#agent-workflow#planning#autonomous-execution#goal-setting#verification#claude-code

Goal Definer任務目標訪談 goal-definer

EN繁中Model-invoked模型叫用

Interview a fuzzy task into a six-element goal prompt an agent can run for hours without drifting or wrapping up early把講不清楚的任務訪談成六元素 goal prompt,讓 agent 自己跑好幾個小時也不偏離、不提早收工

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when you have a long-running task but no plan yet, and the task is still phrased in words like "optimize", "tidy up" or "rewrite" that an agent could declare done at any moment.當你有個要跑很久的任務、但還沒有計畫,而且任務還停在「優化」「整理」「重寫」這種 agent 隨時可以宣稱做完的講法時使用。

When not to何時不要

Not when you already have a written plan and want it turned into a goal — that's Plan → Goal. Not for writing the plan itself, and not for a task one prompt would finish.不要用在已經有寫好的計畫、只想轉成 goal 的情況(那是 Plan → Goal)。也不要用來寫計畫本身,或一個 prompt 就能做完的小任務。

Highlights重點

  • Six elements, asked one at a time: Outcome, Verification, Constraints, Boundaries, Iteration Policy, Blocked Stop Condition — never as a form to fill in六個元素一次問一個:Outcome、Verification、Constraints、Boundaries、Iteration Policy、Blocked Stop Condition,不會丟一張表格叫你填
  • Refuses "better", "more polished", "higher quality" and pushes until another agent could verify completion without you eyeballing it拒絕「更好」「更完整」「更有質感」,逼到另一個 agent 不用你盯著看也能驗證完成為止
  • Names where the original task was ambiguous, so you can see which phrase would have let an agent stop early指出原本任務哪裡模糊,讓你看見是哪個詞會讓 agent 提早收工
  • Flags any element you left vague instead of quietly writing a generic goal around it任何一格你講得含糊,它會明講出來,不會偷偷寫成一份泛泛的 goal
  • When the task hinges on subjective quality, sends you to distil a taste rubric first rather than faking a machine check任務本質是主觀品質時,先請你把品味蒸餾成 rubric,而不是假裝有機器可驗的標準
#agent-workflow#goal-setting#verification#autonomous-execution#interview#claude-code

Autopilot自動駕駛 autopilot

EN繁中User-invoked使用者叫用

Hand over the whole job: orchestrate subagents, self-repair on a budget, pass a verification gate, then commit, push and open a PR without checking back整份工作交出去:以 subagent 為主力執行、故障自修有次數上限、過驗證閘門後 commit、push、開 PR,全程不回頭問

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when a plan is already settled and you want it finished end to end, with every decision batched into one report at the end instead of interrupting you.當計畫已經定案、你要它從頭做到尾,所有決策集中在最後一次回報、不要中途打斷你時使用。

When not to何時不要

Not while the approach is still open, not for exploratory work, and not when you want to see each step before it lands — it commits and pushes without asking.作法還沒定、探索性的工作、或你想逐步確認再落地時,都不要用——它不問就 commit 和 push。

Highlights重點

  • Invoke-only: it never fires on its own, because the run commits and pushes without confirmation只能手動呼叫:它不會自己觸發,因為這一輪會不問就 commit 和 push
  • Orchestrator by default — subagents do the reading and the scoped edits, so a long run doesn't die of context exhaustion預設當協調者——讀檔和有界的修改交給 subagent,長時間執行才不會被 context 耗盡拖垮
  • Three attempts per blocker, each on a different hypothesis, and never routing around a failure by weakening the check that caught it每個卡點三次修復上限,每次必須換一個假設;絕不靠削弱抓到問題的檢查來繞過去
  • Verification gate before any commit: parallel review agents plus the repo's own checks, run in the main loop where you can audit themcommit 前一定過驗證閘門:平行的 review agent 加上 repo 自己的檢查,而且在主迴圈跑給你稽核
  • Isolation settled up front: the ladder decides the cases already forced by git state or your own say-so, and hands the one free choice back as a pre-flight question — worktree or branch in place隔離方式一開始就定案:git 狀態或你自己講明的情況階梯自己判掉,唯一真的有得選的那一種以起飛前提問交還給你——worktree 或原地開分支
#agent-workflow#autonomous-execution#delegation#verification#shipping#claude-code

Breakdown全案攤開 breakdown

EN繁中Model-invoked模型叫用

Lay every case out in full before evaluating any of them, split the problem into decisions only you can make, then wait — recommendation comes last先把每個情況完整攤開再評估,把問題拆成只有你能拍板的決策,然後停住等你回答,建議放到最後

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when a conclusion arrived too fast and you want the ground first — every option, every code path, every failure mode, with facts marked apart from inferences.當結論來得太快、你想先看清楚底盤時使用——所有選項、所有程式路徑、所有失敗模式,而且事實與推論分開標記。

When not to何時不要

Not when you just want one pending decision made clickable (that's Options), and not when nobody knows the answer yet and the point is to explore it together.只是想把一個待決事項變成可點選的選項時不要用(那是 Options);答案雙方都還不知道、目的是一起探索時也不要用。

Highlights重點

  • Enumerate before evaluating: the do-nothing case and the awkward one nobody wants are on the list too, and anything left out is listed as excluded with a reason先列舉再評估:不做的那個案、沒人想選的那個案都在名單上,刻意排除的也要列出並說明理由
  • Every claim is tagged fact (verified, and where) or inference (reasoned, and from what) — the two are never blurred每一條都標明是事實(查證過,來源在哪)還是推論(怎麼推的),兩者絕不混在一起
  • Uniform depth across cases, because a thin section next to a thick one is a decision made on your behalf各案深度一致——一個寫得薄、一個寫得厚,等於幫你先做了決定
  • Phase 2 asks only what changes the outcome, then stops — no answering its own questions, no edits made while you're still deciding第二階段只問會改變結論的問題,然後停住:不自問自答,也不在你還沒回答前先動手改東西
  • Phase 3 accounts for every case from phase 1, so nothing quietly disappears between the layout and the recommendation第三階段會交代第一階段每一個案的下場,不讓任何一案在攤開與建議之間悄悄消失
#agent-workflow#decision-making#analysis#exhaustive-enumeration#claude-code

Options給我選項 options

EN繁中User-invoked使用者叫用

Re-ask whatever is pending as tappable choices, then keep every direction decision clickable for the rest of the session把懸而未決的問題改成可點選的選項重問一次,之後整段對話遇到方向決策都給你點

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when you're tired of typing answers to open-ended questions and want architecture, library, data-model, scope and sequencing calls handed to you as choices.當你不想再打字回答開放式問題,想讓架構、套件、資料模型、範圍、順序這些決策都變成選項給你點時使用。

When not to何時不要

Not for reversible or mechanical steps — those should just get done. Not for laying out an entire decision space in full; that's Breakdown.可逆或機械性的步驟不要用——那些直接做就好。要把整個決策空間完整攤開也不要用,那是 Breakdown。

Highlights重點

  • Acts on what's already on the table first: the last prose question gets re-asked as choices, same context, no restarting the topic先處理已經在桌上的:把最後一個用散文問的問題改成選項重問,脈絡不變、不重啟話題
  • Options are labelled by outcome with the trade-off in one line, and the recommended one comes first and says why選項以結果命名、一行講清取捨,建議的那個排第一並說明理由
  • Combinations are pre-enumerated as their own options, so one click settles it instead of pushing the assembly work onto you可以組合的情況預先列成獨立選項,一次點選就定案,不把拼裝工作丟回給你
  • Covers the axis honestly — both ends listed, including "keep it as is"; if a sensible choice fits nowhere, the axis gets redone誠實覆蓋整個軸線——兩端都列,包含「維持現狀」;有合理選擇無處可歸就重切這條軸
  • Steps aside on request: say "run to completion" and it drops out, batching the decisions into a closing summary你說「一路跑完」它就自動退場,把決策集中到最後的總結
#agent-workflow#decision-making#interaction-style#claude-code

Taste Distiller品味蒸餾 taste-distiller

EN繁中Model-invoked模型叫用

Mine your rejections of AI output and distil the standard behind them into a reusable 1-5 rubric, in Markdown and in JSON for an evaluator agent從你退掉、重寫 AI 產出的實例裡挖出背後的標準,蒸餾成可重複使用的 1-5 分 rubric,同時給 Markdown 和 evaluator 用的 JSON

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Reach for it when you keep rewriting AI output the same way and want the standard written down — as custom instructions, as an evaluator's grading prompt, or as team-visible documentation.當你一再用同樣的方式重寫 AI 產出、想把那套標準寫下來時使用——可以當自訂指令、evaluator 的評分 prompt,或團隊可見的文件。

When not to何時不要

Not for generating content in your style, not for cleaning AI-isms out of one specific draft, and not for defining what an agent run should achieve.不要用它模仿你的風格產出內容、不要用來清理某一份稿子的 AI 味,也不要用來定義一輪 agent 執行的目標。

Highlights重點

  • Runs as rejection-grade-explain cycles over three to five real moments you rewrote something, in your own words以「退稿—評分—解釋」的循環進行,挖三到五個你真的動手重寫過的實例,用你自己的話
  • Refuses "it felt off" and "太 AI 味" — it pushes for the specific word, sentence or structural choice that triggered the reaction拒絕「感覺怪怪的」和「太 AI 味」——一定追問到是哪個字、哪個句子、哪個結構選擇引發的反應
  • Every rubric line is traceable to a rejection you described; no invented preferences每一條 rubric 都能追回到你描述過的某次退稿,不會憑空生出偏好
  • Tiers describe observable behaviour, not quality adjectives — tier 3 is the floor of shippable, tier 5 is the bar各級寫的是可觀察的行為而不是品質形容詞——第 3 級是可出貨的底線,第 5 級才是標準
  • Ships both formats: Markdown you review and refine, JSON an evaluator agent grades against兩種格式一起產出:Markdown 給你審閱調整,JSON 給 evaluator agent 評分用
#taste#rubric#evaluation#writing-quality#interview#claude-code

Developer Spec Workflow開發者技術規格工作流 developer-spec-workflow

EN繁中Model-invoked模型叫用

Take a rough brief through documented grilling to one developer spec, one runnable sample, and end-to-end proof把初始需求逐題問清楚,收斂成一份開發者技術規格、一套可執行 sample 與 end-to-end 證據

What it does細節

When to use何時使用

Use when a project needs the full path from ambiguous initial prompt through durable decisions, a developer-facing technical specification, runnable sample code, and reproducible verification.當專案要從模糊的初始 prompt 開始,經過可追溯的決策訪談,完成開發者技術規格、可執行 sample code 與可重現驗證時使用。

When not to何時不要

Not for a writing-only knowledge document, implementation from an approved spec, an RFP or procurement spec, a bug fix, or a one-off code example.不要用於只有文件的知識整理、依核准規格直接實作、RFP 或採購規格、bug fix,或一次性的 code example。

Highlights重點

  • Preserves the raw brief while confirmed decisions, assumptions, and open questions evolve in a separate context record原始 brief 保持不動,已確認決策、暫定假設與未決問題在獨立 context 持續演進
  • Grills one architecture-changing decision at a time and persists each answer before context can decay一次只追問一個會改變架構的決策,並在 context 衰退前把答案寫回 repo
  • Keeps one specification of record and treats the runnable sample as the source for code behavior只維護一份正式規格,code 行為以實際可執行 sample 為準
  • Ships vertical tracer bullets with happy-path, negative-path, and clean-checkout evidence以垂直 tracer bullet 交付 happy path、negative path 與 clean checkout 證據
#agent-workflow#technical-specification#sample-code#requirements-interview#tdd