Route CEO-first multi-window work into owner-led role loops. Use for 总控/CEO、架构/CTO、内容主编、角色派发与复用、模型路由、来源窗口回调、role-windows 台账、skill 命中统计或 multi-window loop engineering。
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。
Use when a user edits or criticizes generated copy and you need to extract durable writing-style rules instead of merely remembering surface words.
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。
This skill turns user edits into reusable style rules. It prevents the agent from doing the shallow version of learning:
用户用了几个词 → 下次多塞这几个词
The correct goal is:
用户改了什么关系、视角、节奏、风险边界或人群钉子 → 下次按这个写作判断工作
Use this skill after the user edits generated text, rejects a tone, or says a draft does not sound like them.
Use it when the user:
不像我, 太编辑, 太 AI, 太正经, 太抽象, 没网感, 像 README, or 像发布会;不是多用这些词,是要有网感;Do not use it to preserve raw private conversations. Extract rules, not transcripts.
Get the model draft and the user-edited version. If the original is not available, still analyze the user edit, but mark the missing comparison.
Completion criterion: you can point to at least one changed phrase, deleted structure, or added line.
Classify each important change:
| Change type | Question |
|---|---|
| Voice | Did the user make it rougher, sharper, calmer, more local, more personal? |
| Viewpoint | Did the user move from expert explanation to participant experience? |
| Relationship | Did the user show what the tool/project does to a person? |
| Specificity | Did the user replace generic terms with an incident, object, role, or scene? |
| Rhythm | Did the user shorten, fragment, add breath, or keep a deliberate rough edge? |
| Risk boundary | Did the user remove over-cautious disclaimers or add factual anchors? |
| Platform fit | Did the user make it more suitable for XHS/Douyin/WeChat/etc.? |
Completion criterion: every accepted user edit is mapped to at least one reason.
Bad extraction:
User likes 疑似、绷不住、抽象.
Better extraction:
User wants high-intensity internet-native judgment: identify the absurd point in a real situation, then say it with half-joke/half-accurate technical self-mockery. Internet words may appear, but should not be forced.
Completion criterion: the rule would still work if none of the original words were reused.
Store 1-3 compact before/after examples or pattern examples. Do not store entire chat logs, platform metrics, credentials, personal directories, or private context.
Completion criterion: each example demonstrates a rule and is safe to publish or share.
Use the smallest durable destination that will affect future behavior:
| Lesson type | Destination |
|---|---|
| User preference that should follow all sessions | memory / user profile |
| Account-specific writing style | account style guide or content repo reference |
| Reusable agent procedure | skill |
| One-off task state | session notes or current repo files, not memory |
| Raw operational data | operations repo only, not public skills |
Completion criterion: the lesson is stored where the next relevant agent/tool can read it.
Write a tiny future-use prompt fragment, for example:
Use the calibrated style rule: websense comes from identifying the absurd point, not stuffing meme words. Keep technical anchors real, but open with the human friction.
Completion criterion: the prompt fragment is specific enough to change a future draft.
When reporting a calibration result, use:
# 风格校准结论
## 1. 用户改动
## 2. 改动背后的规则
## 3. 下次写作要做
## 4. 下次写作不要做
## 5. 可沉淀位置
## 6. 已沉淀 / 待用户确认
Keep it short. The goal is not literary analysis; the goal is future behavior change.
User changes:
我就是那个有无数想法、但被上班榨到一行代码都不想写的技术中登。
into:
轻松干翻我这种有无数想法、但被上班榨到一行代码都不想写的技术中登。
Do not extract:
Use the phrase 技术中登 more.
Extract:
Do not merely introduce the persona. Show the power relationship: the tool/AI/project has so much energy that it embarrasses, replaces, overwhelms, or exposes the person who was supposed to control it.
When turning a private calibration into a public skill:
user-edited sample / confirmed style sample wording over private chat provenance.不是这些词,是网感, immediately rewrite the rule around judgment.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。
概要と使いどころ
Route CEO-first multi-window work into owner-led role loops. Use for 总控/CEO、架构/CTO、内容主编、角色派发与复用、模型路由、来源窗口回调、role-windows 台账、skill 命中统计或 multi-window loop engineering。
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。
Read-only first workflow for diagnosing application incidents by collecting service, log, network, configuration, and functional evidence before proposing any fix.
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。
Run user-authorized black-box web security tests and evidence-based reports. Use for 黑盒安全测试、渗透测试、数据泄露、未授权访问、公开 JS/API、登录爆破防护、CORS 或安全响应头检查。
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。
Choose the narrowest reliable browser surface across Codex Browser, signed-in Chrome, Playwright CLI, and platform scripts. Use for browser automation, logged-in workflows, UI inspection, screenshots, form filling, publish previews, or frontend QA.
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。
提议并执行 rubric 或 bucket 升级。两种模式:**完整 rubric bump**(最高风险动作,5 步强制 + 跨模型审核)和 **--bucket-only 轻量重校**(只换 bucket 边界,不动 rubric 公式)。**Phase 2 强制走 cheat-score-blind sub-agent 给校准池重打分**——不接受 self-scored fallback。触发词:"升级 rubric"/"bump rubric"/"更新公式"/"我想加一个维度"/"调整权重"/"重校桶"/"recalibrate bucket"。
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。
初始化 cheat-on-content 内容校准工作区。仅在用户明确开始该工作流,或其子 skill 确认缺少 .cheat-state.json 时使用;不响应一般项目初始化、安装诊断或 Codex 首次会话。
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。