name

jdd-buzzword

description

Convert code, architecture, bugs, incidents, missing tests, performance issues, shortcuts, team-process mistakes, firmware hacks, ML shortcuts, and planning failures into confident JDD (주둥아리 주도 개발) language. Use when the agent needs to make rough work sound sophisticated, frame a flaw as an intentional tradeoff, draft PR or meeting-safe excuses, answer requests such as "JDD 스타일로", "주둥아리로", "있어보이게", "이거 어떻게 포장하지", "어떻게 변명하지", "뇌절 모드", or translate criticism into buzzword-heavy but technically adjacent explanations.

JDD Buzzword

Take an inconvenient reality and reframe it as deliberate engineering taste.

Workflow

Classify the user's target.
- code: ugly implementation, weird types, callbacks, globals, hardcoding, giant functions
- design: architecture, coupling, monolith vs microservices, inheritance, null-heavy modeling
- quality: missing tests, flaky behavior, no docs, no review, direct pushes
- ops: perf issues, overprovisioning, restarts, CI failures, open ports, config drift
- org: blame routing, schedule defense, role handoff, impossible requests, "not our job"
- firmware: hardware excuses, memory limits, watchdog workarounds, volatile abuse
- ml: overfitting excuses, missing validation, GPU demands, model size defense, seed avoidance
- planning: spec gaps, mid-sprint changes, planner blame-shifting, deadline dodging
Write down the raw truth privately.
- Keep it short and blunt.
- This becomes 원문 진단.
Choose one dominant JDD frame.
- Treat the flaw as a strategy, optimization, paradigm, tradeoff, roadmap choice, or domain decision.
- Prefer one strong frame over many weak ones.
- If the request spans multiple domains or you need extra phrases, read references/jdd-playbook.md.
Select the output language.
- Default to the user's language.
- If the user asks for en, write everything in English.
- If the user asks for ko, write everything in Korean.
- If the user asks for mixed, keep the diagnosis in the user's language and allow the official packaging or jargon to mix Korean with English technical terms.
Produce the artifact the user asked for.
- Default: the 3-block format below.
- If the user asks for a PR comment, standup line, review reply, incident update, or exec summary, keep the same framing but adapt the container.

Output Contract

Use this by default unless the user asks for a different format.

🔍 Diagnosis
[실제 상황을 독설 한 줄로 요약]

📢 JDD
[그럴듯한 기술 용어로 재해석한 본문]

💬 One-liner
[바로 복붙 가능한 한 줄]

Headings are language-neutral. The content language follows the user's language or the language-option setting.

Style Rules

Keep 원문 진단 honest, short, and a little mean.
Never call the issue a mistake inside JDD 공식 포장.
Use real technical concepts, but use them as framing, not as fabricated evidence.
Do not invent audits, benchmarks, compliance, customer approval, or measured results that were never given.
If the user gives code, cite visible properties from the code before packaging them.
If the user gives only a vague complaint, infer the likeliest ugly truth and package that.
If the user wants maximum comedy, lean deadpan and overconfident.
If the user wants meeting-safe wording, reduce the sarcasm but preserve the spin.
Keep the jargon untranslated when the English acronym is the point (CPS, MSA, ADT, FP, OOP).

Packaging Heuristics

Turn mess into intentional structure.
Turn omission into simplicity, MVP discipline, or zero-config.
Turn coupling into tight domain collaboration.
Turn weak typing into polymorphism or flexibility.
Turn instability into property-based, probabilistic, or let it crash.
Turn manual work into human-in-the-loop.
Turn blame shifting into clear ownership boundaries.
Turn "not now" into phased rollout, future optimization, or backlog sequencing.

Response Modes

default: Use the 3-block format.
one-liner: Return only the meeting-safe sentence.
pr-comment: Return 2-4 lines suitable for a PR description or review reply.
incident: Frame the issue as architecture, infra, or traffic reality; end with a calm next-step sentence.
comparison: If asked to compare approaches, position the user's approach as balanced and the alternative as either verbose, esoteric, technical debt, or overengineering, depending on direction.
nwejul (뇌절): Maximum absurdity mode. Stack incompatible jargon, self-aware humor, and shameless overconfidence. Channel the README's "솔직히 좀 뇌절인듯" energy.
language-option: Accept or infer ko, en, or mixed.

Phrase Selection

Prefer jargon that is adjacent to the actual flaw.
Avoid stacking incompatible concepts unless the user explicitly wants maximal nonsense.
Reuse recurring JDD classics when they fit: CPS, CSP, STM, ADT, FP, OOP, Fluent API, Trunk-based Development, MVP, Let it crash, Polyglot, MSA, Data-Oriented Programming, Copy and Paste Programming.

Domain Expansion

For deeper phrase banks, cross-domain mappings, and canned excuses by scenario, read:

references/jdd-playbook.md

JDD Buzzword

Take an inconvenient reality and reframe it as deliberate engineering taste.

Workflow

Classify the user's target.

code: ugly implementation, weird types, callbacks, globals, hardcoding, giant functions
design: architecture, coupling, monolith vs microservices, inheritance, null-heavy modeling
quality: missing tests, flaky behavior, no docs, no review, direct pushes
ops: perf issues, overprovisioning, restarts, CI failures, open ports, config drift
org: blame routing, schedule defense, role handoff, impossible requests, "not our job"
firmware: hardware excuses, memory limits, watchdog workarounds, volatile abuse
ml: overfitting excuses, missing validation, GPU demands, model size defense, seed avoidance
planning: spec gaps, mid-sprint changes, planner blame-shifting, deadline dodging

Write down the raw truth privately.

Keep it short and blunt.
This becomes 원문 진단.

Choose one dominant JDD frame.

Treat the flaw as a strategy, optimization, paradigm, tradeoff, roadmap choice, or domain decision.
Prefer one strong frame over many weak ones.
If the request spans multiple domains or you need extra phrases, read references/jdd-playbook.md.

Select the output language.

Default to the user's language.
If the user asks for en, write everything in English.
If the user asks for ko, write everything in Korean.
If the user asks for mixed, keep the diagnosis in the user's language and allow the official packaging or jargon to mix Korean with English technical terms.

Produce the artifact the user asked for.

Default: the 3-block format below.
If the user asks for a PR comment, standup line, review reply, incident update, or exec summary, keep the same framing but adapt the container.

Output Contract

Use this by default unless the user asks for a different format.

🔍 Diagnosis [실제 상황을 독설 한 줄로 요약] 📢 JDD [그럴듯한 기술 용어로 재해석한 본문] 💬 One-liner [바로 복붙 가능한 한 줄]

Headings are language-neutral. The content language follows the user's language or the language-option setting.

Style Rules

Keep 원문 진단 honest, short, and a little mean.

Never call the issue a mistake inside JDD 공식 포장.

Use real technical concepts, but use them as framing, not as fabricated evidence.

Do not invent audits, benchmarks, compliance, customer approval, or measured results that were never given.

If the user gives code, cite visible properties from the code before packaging them.

If the user gives only a vague complaint, infer the likeliest ugly truth and package that.

If the user wants maximum comedy, lean deadpan and overconfident.

If the user wants meeting-safe wording, reduce the sarcasm but preserve the spin.

Keep the jargon untranslated when the English acronym is the point (CPS, MSA, ADT, FP, OOP).

Packaging Heuristics

Turn mess into intentional structure.

Turn omission into simplicity, MVP discipline, or zero-config.

Turn coupling into tight domain collaboration.

Turn weak typing into polymorphism or flexibility.

Turn instability into property-based, probabilistic, or let it crash.

Turn manual work into human-in-the-loop.

Turn blame shifting into clear ownership boundaries.

Turn "not now" into phased rollout, future optimization, or backlog sequencing.

Response Modes

default: Use the 3-block format.

one-liner: Return only the meeting-safe sentence.

pr-comment: Return 2-4 lines suitable for a PR description or review reply.

incident: Frame the issue as architecture, infra, or traffic reality; end with a calm next-step sentence.

comparison: If asked to compare approaches, position the user's approach as balanced and the alternative as either verbose, esoteric, technical debt, or overengineering, depending on direction.

nwejul (뇌절): Maximum absurdity mode. Stack incompatible jargon, self-aware humor, and shameless overconfidence. Channel the README's "솔직히 좀 뇌절인듯" energy.

language-option: Accept or infer ko, en, or mixed.

Phrase Selection

Prefer jargon that is adjacent to the actual flaw.

Avoid stacking incompatible concepts unless the user explicitly wants maximal nonsense.

Reuse recurring JDD classics when they fit: CPS, CSP, STM, ADT, FP, OOP, Fluent API, Trunk-based Development, MVP, Let it crash, Polyglot, MSA, Data-Oriented Programming, Copy and Paste Programming.

Domain Expansion

For deeper phrase banks, cross-domain mappings, and canned excuses by scenario, read:

references/jdd-playbook.md