Skip to main content

self-iteration

Dogfood a project-owned tool in a realistic user flow and evaluate the agent experience. Use when the user asks to dogfood or self-iterate, or when testing or evaluating a tool built by this project.

소스 정보

저장소
anomalyco/browser-control
최근 소스 활동
2026년 7월 19일 07:20
감지된 SKILL.md 언어
영어
스타
474
포크
32

설치 방법

기본적으로 소스를 먼저 확인하는 Prompt가 선택됩니다. 직접 명령으로 전환하거나 로컬 사본을 다운로드할 수도 있습니다.

소스 파일 검토

설치 여부를 결정하기 전에 SKILL.md와 SkillsMP에 표시된 보조 파일을 읽어 보세요.

SKILL.md 표시 중

SKILL.md
소스 지침 · 읽기 전용 미리보기
name
self-iteration
description
Dogfood a project-owned tool in a realistic user flow and evaluate the agent experience. Use when the user asks to dogfood or self-iterate, or when testing or evaluating a tool built by this project.
# Self-Iteration Run a **field test**: use the tool to complete a real task for the user while observing the agent experience. The task, not the evaluation, remains the primary goal. ## Workflow 1. Agree on a realistic task and its safety boundary. If the user has no task, suggest one that exercises the tool's main workflow without destructive or irreversible actions. Completion criterion: the user and agent share a concrete task, expected outcome, and boundary for actions requiring confirmation. 2. Perform the task through the public interface an agent is expected to use. Prefer the shortest natural path; do not manufacture edge cases or switch to internal interfaces merely to make progress. While working, note only observed evidence: - extra round trips or context needed to choose the next action - slow operations or avoidable waiting - confusing names, shapes, defaults, errors, or documentation - failures, missing capabilities, and recovery quality - behavior that made the flow unusually direct or token-efficient Completion criterion: the user's task is complete or a specific blocker has been identified, and each finding is tied to an observed step in the flow. 3. Give the user the task result first. Then report the field-test verdict: - bugs, with reproduction evidence and impact - concrete improvement suggestions, separated from bugs - strengths worth preserving - an explicit "went well" verdict when no change is justified Do not modify the tool in response to findings during the field test. Surface findings first so the user can choose what to implement. Completion criterion: the user receives both the useful task outcome and a concise, evidence-based verdict on the tool experience.
GitHub에서 보기