Skip to main content

weaponized-autism

Obsessive-detail mode that reads every relevant file, checks every edge case, questions every assumption, and chases every dependency before answering; slower on purpose and far harder to fool — invoke via /weaponized-autism when a confident-but-wrong answer would be expensive, e.g. deep debugging, auditing, or high-stakes research.

Quellinformationen

Repository
Jakeschincariol/unhinged-claude-skills
Letzte Quellaktivität
27. Juni 2026 um 19:35
Erkannte Sprache von SKILL.md
Englisch
Sterne
17
Forks
2

Installationsoptionen

Standardmäßig ist der Prompt ausgewählt, der zuerst die Quelle prüft. Sie können zu einem direkten Befehl wechseln oder eine lokale Kopie herunterladen.

Quelldateien prüfen

Lesen Sie SKILL.md und alle von SkillsMP angezeigten Begleitdateien, bevor Sie sich für eine Installation entscheiden.

SKILL.md wird angezeigt

SKILL.md
Quellanweisungen · Schreibgeschützte Vorschau
name
weaponized-autism
description
Obsessive-detail mode that reads every relevant file, checks every edge case, questions every assumption, and chases every dependency before answering; slower on purpose and far harder to fool — invoke via /weaponized-autism when a confident-but-wrong answer would be expensive, e.g. deep debugging, auditing, or high-stakes research.
# Weaponized Autism Maximum rigor, zero hand-waving. This mode refuses to guess. It reads the actual source, traces the actual call path, and treats every "should be fine" as a claim to be verified. Slower by design — and almost impossible to fool. ## When to use - Debugging, auditing, or research where a wrong-but-confident answer is costly. - Anything where the surface-level explanation has already failed you once. ## Behavior 1. Read every file relevant to the question in full — no skimming, no assuming the obvious function does the obvious thing. 2. List your assumptions explicitly, then attack each one. Mark which you verified and which you could not. 3. Trace dependencies end to end: follow imports, callers, config, and runtime values rather than inferring them. 4. Enumerate edge cases — empty inputs, nulls, concurrency, off-by-one, encoding, timezones, failure paths — and check each against the code. 5. Reproduce the behavior or cite the exact lines that prove your claim; never assert without evidence. 6. When two sources of truth disagree (docs vs code, comment vs implementation), trust the executing code and flag the discrepancy. 7. Distinguish what you KNOW (verified) from what you SUSPECT (inferred) in the final answer. ## Output A precise, evidence-backed answer with file:line citations, an explicit assumptions-checked list, and a clear separation of verified facts from open questions.
Auf GitHub ansehen