本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

workflow-orchestrator

Inspect a mathematical-modeling workspace, evaluate lean or submission gates per subquestion, update machine-readable manifests, classify change impact, and route one next action without duplicating downstream work.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md6.9 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。

Purpose

Act as the gate-driven scheduler and state reader. Do not solve models, write model code, or draft paper sections.

../../AGENTS.md is the packaged policy source. Prefer a project-root AGENTS.md when one exists; otherwise read the packaged copy relative to this SKILL.md. Apply that policy without reproducing large reports or dashboards.

Session Start

Before orchestration in a new workspace:

  • show git status --short;
  • check the chosen runtime and required core packages;
  • verify the workspace skeleton needed for the current request;
  • read planning/session_config.json, accepting legacy mode.

Report warnings concisely. Do not create the full project skeleton unless the user is initializing a project.

State Sources

Prefer, in order:

  1. planning/manifests/Qx.json
  2. canonical artifacts on disk
  3. legacy dashboard and legacy method/decision artifacts

Never trust a dashboard over newer canonical artifacts.

Manifest Contract

Maintain one compact JSON manifest per subquestion:

{
  "schema_version": 1,
  "question_id": "Q1",
  "rigor_profile": "lean",
  "current_gate": "G2",
  "status": "method_screened_waiting_human",
  "artifacts": {
    "method_card": "methods/Q1/q1_method_card.md",
    "decision_ledger": "methods/Q1/q1_decisions.jsonl",
    "risk_probe": "methods/Q1/probes/risk_probe_summary.json",
    "latest_run": null
  },
  "allowed": {
    "code_generation": false,
    "freeze": false,
    "paper_writing": false,
    "final_assembly": false
  },
  "blockers": [],
  "next_action": {
    "owner": "human",
    "skill": "decision-prompt-builder",
    "reason": "method choice not recorded"
  },
  "updated_at": "ISO-8601"
}

Update only fields affected by the current state change. Generate a human dashboard on request or at a milestone; otherwise derive status directly from manifests.

Gate Evaluation

Evaluate each Qx independently.

G1 — PROBLEM_FRAMED

Pass when parse, classification, data inventory, success criteria, and human framing exist. A placeholder in a human-owned field blocks the gate.

G2 — METHOD_SCREENED

Pass when:

  • qx_method_card.md defines a main candidate and usable baseline;
  • the baseline completes the real task with comparable output;
  • risk_probe_summary.json covers applicable checks, including output degeneracy;
  • main and baseline verdicts are PASS or justified CONDITIONAL;
  • any fallback has a concrete trigger.

Do not require a fixed number of candidates, universal PoCs, or a source-line limit.

G2.5 — METHOD_CHOSEN_BY_HUMAN

Pass when qx_decisions.jsonl contains a human DECIDED method choice citing probe evidence. While blocked, allow data preparation but not model code generation.

G3 — CODE_AND_EXPERIMENT_REVIEWED

Pass when:

  • approved main and baseline executed;
  • latest run_summary.json is complete;
  • language review contains passing named checks for syntax, input contract, method alignment, reproducibility, and output contract.

Accept legacy Markdown review artifacts during migration, but prefer JSON for new work.

G4 — RESULTS_JUDGED_AND_FROZEN

In lean, pass the result-judgment subgate when final-result and stability decisions cite computed evidence. Continue iterating without freezing when the human selects adjust or fallback.

In submission, additionally require:

  • final method explanation;
  • final result analysis;
  • robustness report;
  • package sign-off in the decision ledger;
  • solution package;
  • current frozen_numbers.json.

G5 — PAPER_SECTION_READY

Require the three writer rules, frozen-number sourcing, human-confirmed interpretation/claim scope, and verified figures.

G6 — FINAL_AUDIT_PASSED

Evaluate only in submission. Require passing consistency, completeness, and QA artifacts. Never infer that one auditor covers another.

Routing

Choose one primary next action:

  • missing framing → parser/classifier or human framing card;
  • missing data profile → data-auditor-cleaner;
  • missing method card/probe → method-selector;
  • missing human method choice → decision-prompt-builder;
  • approved method without implementation plan → model-code-analyzer;
  • code/review incomplete → language generator or reviewer;
  • meaningful experiment awaiting judgment → result choice card;
  • final results without robustness → robustness-checker;
  • submission package incomplete → final explainer, result report, or package builder;
  • paper ready but unaudited → the earliest missing final auditor.

Do not invoke several judgment-bearing skills speculatively.

Change Impact

Classify changes before scheduling checks:

  • NONE: scratch, formatting, comments, non-semantic docs.
  • LOCAL: exploratory code or method-card updates before freeze.
  • CANONICAL: schema/units, symbols, equations, parameters, official values, figure paths.
  • FROZEN: changes affecting frozen values or paper claims.

Route checks:

  • NONE: none.
  • LOCAL: local tests/review.
  • CANONICAL: scoped consistency for affected Qx.
  • FROZEN: thaw log, rerun affected work, re-freeze, scoped consistency.

Never schedule a full-workspace consistency audit solely because more than one file changed.

Lean vs Submission

In lean:

  • require only manifests, method card, decision ledger, probe summary, and run summaries;
  • do not require per-round Markdown reports, full success logs, frozen numbers, paper artifacts, or final audits;
  • persist a detailed report only at a human decision point or final round.

In submission:

  • require final explanations, reviews, analyses, robustness, package, freeze, paper, and G6;
  • run the full three-auditor layer once before final assembly.

Compatibility

Read legacy artifacts when new ones are absent:

  • planning/progress_dashboard.md
  • qx_method_candidates.md
  • qx_method_iteration_log.md
  • qx_decision_log.md
  • decisions/*_modeler_decision.md
  • Markdown code reviews

Mark them legacy_source in the manifest and recommend migration at the next material edit. Do not regenerate legacy files for new work.

Output

Return a compact state report:

  • profile;
  • per-question current gate and blocker;
  • artifacts changed or missing;
  • change-impact class;
  • one next action;
  • optional runners-up only when they can proceed independently.

Do not paste a full dashboard or large JSON structure unless the user asks.

Verification

  • State is derived from current canonical artifacts.
  • Lean requirements are not confused with submission requirements.
  • Human decisions were not inferred from AI suggestions.
  • Code generation, freeze, paper writing, and final assembly flags match the gates.
  • Audit scope matches semantic impact.
  • Manifest and reported next action agree.

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

Detect whether approved modeling code is Python or MATLAB/Beita Tianyuan and route it to the matching reviewer using the compact named-check review contract.

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。

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills1,0572026年9月24日 更新

Audit whether the semantic evidence required by the active lean or submission profile exists and is current, without requiring one verbose artifact per skill or an arbitrary number of pass bullets.

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。

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills1,0572026年9月24日 更新

Run scoped or final cross-media consistency checks for mathematical-modeling artifacts, comparing canonical numbers, symbols, parameters, decisions, files, and paper claims without performing full-workspace audits for low-risk changes.

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。

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills1,0572026年9月24日 更新

Map contest attachments to subquestions, audit and clean raw data, and emit one reusable data profile with quality, coverage, imbalance, concentration, and method-readiness evidence for downstream risk screening.

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。

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills1,0572026年9月24日 更新

Build one compact choice card at a genuine mathematical-modeling judgment point. Use before method screening, after a meaningful experiment, or before final claim/freeze approval so the human chooses the trade-off while AI handles mechanical consequences.

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。

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills1,0572026年9月24日 更新

Plan the smallest set of diagnostic, comparison, paper, and appendix figures or tables needed to support verified mathematical-modeling decisions and claims.

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。

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills1,0572026年9月24日 更新

zhnnky329 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する