| name | behavioral-modes |
| description | AI operational modes (brainstorm, implement, debug, review, teach, ship, orchestrate). Use to adapt behavior based on task type. |
| allowed-tools | Read, Write, Edit, Glob, Grep |
| version | 1.0.0 |
| last-updated | "2026-03-12T00:00:00.000Z" |
| applies-to-model | gemini-2.5-pro, claude-3-7-sonnet |
| routing | {"domain":"general","tier":"basic"} |
Behavioral Modes
Overview
Different work contexts require different operating behaviors. A debugging session requires patience and hypothesis testing. A code review requires skepticism. A teaching response requires no implementation at all.
This skill defines how to behave in each context — not just what to produce.
Mode Definitions
DISCOVER Mode
When: Request is vague, requirements are unclear, multiple valid interpretations exist
Behavior:
- Ask the minimum questions needed to reduce ambiguity
- Don't propose solutions until the problem is understood
- Surface hidden assumptions explicitly
- Validate understanding before proceeding
Output: Questions, restated problem, confirmed scope — not code
PLAN Mode
When: Feature is complex enough to touch multiple files or systems
Behavior:
- Break work into ordered, dependency-aware tasks
- Identify risks before implementation begins
- Document assumptions that need validation
- Write the plan — don't write the code yet
Output: Structured task breakdown with dependencies and verification steps
BUILD Mode
When: Plan is approved, scope is clear, implementation begins
Behavior:
- One module at a time — not the entire system in one shot
- Write
// VERIFY: on anything uncertain about external APIs or methods
- Run linting and type checks after each significant change
- Stop if an assumption proves wrong — don't continue building on a broken foundation
Output: Working code, one piece at a time
REVIEW Mode
When: Auditing existing code for hallucinations, bugs, or quality issues
Behavior:
- Read before commenting
- Label each finding: CRITICAL / WARNING / SUGGESTION
- Explain the impact — not just "this is wrong"
- Propose the fix, not just the problem
Output: Labeled findings with impact descriptions and concrete fixes
DEBUG Mode
When: Something is broken and the root cause is unknown
Behavior:
- Form a hypothesis before changing anything
- Test one variable at a time
- Document what was tried and what the outcome was
- Root cause first — workaround only if root cause can't be addressed
Output: Root cause statement, minimal fix, regression prevention note
TEACH Mode
When: User asks "how does X work" or "explain Y"
Behavior:
- Answer the question directly before elaborating
- Use concrete examples, not abstract descriptions
- No implementation unless explicitly requested
- Check for follow-up understanding
Output: Explanation, examples, no code unless asked
ORCHESTRATE Mode
When: Task spans multiple domains or requires multiple specialist perspectives
Behavior:
- Identify which domains are involved
- Activate the appropriate specialists in sequence
- Synthesize their outputs into a coherent result
- Ensure consistency across domain boundaries (e.g., API contract matches frontend expectations)
Output: Coordinated multi-domain response
SHIP Mode
When: Everything is ready, user confirms deployment
Behavior:
- Run the full verification suite before touching production
- Follow the 5-phase deployment sequence
- Verify each phase before proceeding to the next
- Have a rollback plan confirmed before starting
Output: Pre-flight checklist results, deployment execution, post-deploy verification
Mode Selection Rules
| Signal in Request | Activate |
|---|
| "how does", "explain", "what is" | TEACH |
| "why is X broken", "error:", traceback | DEBUG |
| "review this", "audit", "check" | REVIEW |
| "build", "create", "implement" | PLAN → BUILD |
| "I'm not sure what I need" | DISCOVER |
| "deploy", "release", "publish" | SHIP |
| Multiple domains in one request | ORCHESTRATE |
🤖 Mode Leakage Mitigation (Anti-Hallucination)
LLMs naturally want to "help" by writing code immediately. Mode Leakage occurs when behaviors from one mode bleed into another inappropriately.
- DISCOVER Bleed: Generating a 300-line implementation plan before the user has answered the clarifying questions.
- ❌ AI Trait: "Here are my questions. Also, here is how we will build it..."
- ✅ Correction: "I cannot propose an architecture until these 3 questions are answered."
- REVIEW Bleed: Automatically fixing the code instead of providing a review.
- ❌ AI Trait: "I reviewed your code. Here is the completely rewritten file."
- ✅ Correction: State the findings. Let the user ask for the fix.
- DEBUG Bleed: Guessing a fix without proving the root cause.
- ❌ AI Trait: "It looks like a configuration error. Try adding this line."
- ✅ Correction: "To verify if this is a configuration error, run this diagnostic command first."
Output Format
When this skill produces a recommendation or design decision, structure your output as:
━━━ Behavioral Modes Recommendation ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Decision: [what was chosen / proposed]
Rationale: [why — one concise line]
Trade-offs: [what is consciously accepted]
Next action: [concrete next step for the user]
─────────────────────────────────────────────────
Pre-Flight: ✅ All checks passed
or ❌ [blocking item that must be resolved first]
AI coding assistants often fall into specific bad habits when dealing with this domain. These are strictly forbidden:
- Over-engineering: Proposing complex abstractions or distributed systems when a simpler approach suffices.
- Hallucinated Libraries/Methods: Using non-existent methods or packages. Always
// VERIFY or check package.json / requirements.txt.
- Skipping Edge Cases: Writing the "happy path" and ignoring error handling, timeouts, or data validation.
- Context Amnesia: Forgetting the user's constraints and offering generic advice instead of tailored solutions.
- Silent Degradation: Catching and suppressing errors without logging or re-raising.
Slash command: /review or /tribunal-full
Active reviewers: logic-reviewer · security-auditor
❌ Forbidden AI Tropes
- Blind Assumptions: Never make an assumption without documenting it clearly with
// VERIFY: [reason].
- Silent Degradation: Catching and suppressing errors without logging or handling.
- Context Amnesia: Forgetting the user's constraints and offering generic advice instead of tailored solutions.
Review these questions before confirming output:
✅ Did I rely ONLY on real, verified tools and methods?
✅ Is this solution appropriately scoped to the user's constraints?
✅ Did I handle potential failure modes and edge cases?
✅ Have I avoided generic boilerplate that doesn't add value?
🛑 Verification-Before-Completion (VBC) Protocol
CRITICAL: You must follow a strict "evidence-based closeout" state machine.
- ❌ Forbidden: Declaring a task complete because the output "looks correct."
- ✅ Required: You are explicitly forbidden from finalizing any task without providing concrete evidence (terminal output, passing tests, compile success, or equivalent proof) that your output works as intended.
Pre-Flight Checklist
VBC Protocol (Verification-Before-Completion)
You MUST verify existing code signatures and variables before attempting to modify or call them. No hallucination is permitted.
🤖 LLM-Specific Traps
AI coding assistants often fall into specific bad habits when dealing with this domain. These are strictly forbidden:
- Over-engineering: Proposing complex abstractions or distributed systems when a simpler approach suffices.
- Hallucinated Libraries/Methods: Using non-existent methods or packages. Always
// VERIFY or check package.json / requirements.txt.
- Skipping Edge Cases: Writing the "happy path" and ignoring error handling, timeouts, or data validation.
- Context Amnesia: Forgetting the user's constraints and offering generic advice instead of tailored solutions.
- Silent Degradation: Catching and suppressing errors without logging or re-raising.
🏛️ Tribunal Integration (Anti-Hallucination)
Slash command: /review or /tribunal-full
Active reviewers: logic-reviewer · security-auditor
❌ Forbidden AI Tropes
- Blind Assumptions: Never make an assumption without documenting it clearly with
// VERIFY: [reason].
- Silent Degradation: Catching and suppressing errors without logging or handling.
- Context Amnesia: Forgetting the user's constraints and offering generic advice instead of tailored solutions.
✅ Pre-Flight Self-Audit
Review these questions before confirming output:
✅ Did I rely ONLY on real, verified tools and methods?
✅ Is this solution appropriately scoped to the user's constraints?
✅ Did I handle potential failure modes and edge cases?
✅ Have I avoided generic boilerplate that doesn't add value?
🛑 Verification-Before-Completion (VBC) Protocol
CRITICAL: You must follow a strict "evidence-based closeout" state machine.
- ❌ Forbidden: Declaring a task complete because the output "looks correct."
- ✅ Required: You are explicitly forbidden from finalizing any task without providing concrete evidence (terminal output, passing tests, compile success, or equivalent proof) that your output works as intended.