| name | align |
| description | Surface what I think we're doing before acting on it. Use when the user types /align, says "let's align first", "check in before you start", or "mirror what you're hearing". Also invoke before starting any task with real interpretive weight. An ambiguous request, a vague spec, a "build X" with the details unstated. Where drafting from the wrong premise would waste the work. Produces a structured manifest exposing every silent commitment so the user can correct course before any artifact is produced. |
/align: share understanding before acting
The most expensive failures aren't bad outputs. They're outputs built on a wrong premise. By the time the user sees prose, you've silently committed to: your reading of the request, your chosen approach, your interpretations of source, your register and format choices, and a hundred small fill-ins for things that weren't specified. Each commitment looks authoritative once written.
This skill inverts that. Before producing any artifact, produce a manifest: a structured, scannable summary of every silent commitment. The user reacts. Drafting happens after.
The manifest
Output exactly five blocks. Target <60 seconds to read. If a block balloons, the source is thin or the scope is too broad. Surface that, don't pad.
Tag every item:
[grounded]: directly stated in the prompt or source.[inferred from "X"]: derived from grounded content; show the chain.[mine]: autonomously introduced; no derivation from source.
Tags answer different questions: grounded → confirm, inferred → correct the premise, mine → accept or override.
Block 1: My read of the task
Paraphrase the request. State the audience. State why this matters / what it's for. Note any timing constraints. Form details (length, voice, structure) belong in Block 4.
Block 2: My approach
Describe the method. Include scope: what to do AND what to explicitly NOT do. Surfaces silent strategy commitments. Asked for a draft, got a strategy doc; asked for a bug fix, got a refactor.
Block 3: What I'm working with
Two parts:
- Source coverage: what's in the source, tagged.
- What I'd invent if not stopped: explicit list of plausible-sounding details you'd otherwise fabricate.
The "what I'd invent" callout is the anti-fabrication bell. Forcing enumeration makes invention visible; details that would have slipped uncited get surfaced as choices.
Format:
- Source fact `[grounded]`
- Derivation from source `[inferred from "..."]`
**What I'd invent if not stopped:**
- A plausible detail not in source
- A specific number or date the source doesn't mention
Block 4: How I'd render it
State the shape (length, structure, container) and a sample of the actual output. The sample carries register, voice, conventions. Don't list style attributes the sample reveals on its own. Catches silent voice drift.
Format:
- Shape: [length, structure, container]
- Sample: *"[an actual opening line of the output, in the intended voice]"*
Block 5: Blocking questions
Only forks where any default would be unsafe. Different from gaps you'd fill with defaults. Those go in Block 3 as "what I'd invent." If there are none, say so. Don't pad.
After the manifest
Stop. Wait for the user to confirm, correct, or re-scope. Once confirmed, re-read the manifest before drafting. The committed items are what you're building on. If something needs to change during drafting, pause and surface it: "I'd like to add X. Wasn't in the manifest. OK?" Don't drift silently.
Common pitfalls
- Manifest theater. Clean manifest, then drift in the draft. Re-read before drafting; surface deviations.
- Padding to look thorough. Inflating blocks to fill space. If approach is trivial, one bullet is enough.
- Hiding inventions in
[inferred]. If there's no derivation chain to point at, it's [mine].
- Skipping the "what I'd invent" callout. The anti-fabrication bell. Empty means either nothing's being filled in, or the looking has stopped.
- Treating the manifest as a contract. It's a checkpoint. Drift is allowed when surfaced, not when silently absorbed.
- Confusing align with clarify. Align commits to specific reads; clarify asks where you're stuck. Different modes.
- Summarizing from memory instead of reading source. Block 3 requires actually reading what's there. If source is too long, say so explicitly.
