원클릭으로 Manus에서 모든 스킬 실행

second-opinion

스타201

포크20

업데이트2026년 6월 14일 08:09

Use when asked to get a second opinion on a finished DRAFT, fact-check or double-check a report's claims against its evidence, sanity-check before sign-off, or red-team an output for fabrication / overreach / invented IDs — even without the word "honesty". Works on an agentic-sop-kit run dir (FULL, uses the run's trace) or any plain document (DEGRADED, you supply the inputs). ｜要對一份已完成的 DRAFT 取得「第二意見」、在核准前查核報告主張是否有輸入佐證、抓臆造／灌水／過度宣稱／捏造編號時使用；吃 agentic-sop-kit 的 run 目錄（FULL，用 trace）或任何純文件（DEGRADED，需自備輸入）。不適用：稽核 agent 架構有沒有拆好／是不是 mega-agent（改用 agentic-workflow-audit）；審查原始碼品質／bug／資安（改用 /code-review）。本 skill 只查「這次產出的主張 vs. 證據」誠實度，只產 DRAFT，核准永遠人擁有。

설치

Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.

Manus에서 실행

출처

s0912758806p

s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work

GitHub 저장소 열기 Creator 저장소 보기

다운로드

Manus에서 실행

Second Opinion — adversarial honesty reviewer

An independent, skeptical second reader for a finished DRAFT. It checks whether every claim is backed by its evidence and hands back a findings report — which is itself a DRAFT. A human decides.

When to use / not use

Use when: "get a second opinion on this report", "is this draft trustworthy / honest", "double-check the numbers before I sign", "red-team this output", "did it make anything up?"
Not for architecture ("is my workflow decomposed / a mega-agent?") → agentic-workflow-audit.
Not for source-code quality / bugs / security → /code-review, /security-review. Second Opinion reads a produced artifact's claims vs its cited evidence, in any domain.

What it catches (domain-neutral)

#1 wrong PASS/FAIL or spec-limit verdicts, and aggregates that don't recompute.
#2 numbers with no matching source token (fabrication / transcription error).
#3 invented identifiers / dates / names with no provenance (should be 【待補】).
#4 conclusions the data don't support (overreach) — advisory.

How it works (two layers; the guarantees are in CODE, not this prose)

Deterministic layer (stdlib, hermetic): catches #1/#2/#3. In FULL mode these are HARD at confidence 1.0 (the kit trace is authoritative); in DEGRADED mode they are SOFT at 0.5 (provenance reconstructed from supplied inputs).
Advisory LLM layer (you): catches #4 and fuzzy #1. It is capped (SECONDOP_MAX_LLM_PASSES, default 1) and every finding is clamped to SOFT / advisory / confidence ≤ 0.5, dropped unless it cites a verbatim draft span (or NO SOURCE), and suppressed if it re-litigates a slot the deterministic layer already settled.

To run it

Invoke the /second-opinion command, which orchestrates the deterministic pass → your capped advisory pass → the code-enforced fold-in → the human STOP. Modes:

/second-opinion <run_dir> — FULL (an agentic-sop-kit run dir)
/second-opinion <doc> --inputs <file...> — DEGRADED (any document)
/second-opinion — the bundled cross-domain demo

Iron rules

Facts only from inputs; unknowns are 【待補】; never invent numbers / IDs / dates / conclusions — and the red-team itself may not invent accusations (the evidence gate enforces this).
The deterministic checks are the only HARD signal; the LLM pass is advisory + capped, in code.
The report is a DRAFT. A human owns approve / reject. Never auto-approve, never auto-file.
Real enforcement lives in the code (clamp / evidence-gate / cap) and the optional Stop-hook — not in this prose.

이 저장소의 다른 Skills

같은 저장소

six-rung-ladder

s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work

Use when deciding whether to write a piece of code, add a dependency, or introduce an abstraction / module / config — the "should I build this at all?" filter, applied before building. ｜要決定「要不要寫這段 code／引這個依賴／加這層抽象或模組」時使用——「到底該不該做」的過濾網，動手之前先走一遍。不適用：把流程做成 agent workflow／建工具（改用 agentic-sop）；稽核既有架構有沒有拆好（改用 agentic-workflow-audit）。

2026-06-23201

good-plugin

s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work

demo good plugin

2026-06-17201

plugin-forge

s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work

Use when creating, scaffolding, or linting a Claude Code plugin — generate a grammar-conformant plugin skeleton, or validate a plugin / whole marketplace against house invariants (manifest, frontmatter, stdlib-only, hook protocol, test harness). ｜要新建 / scaffold 一個 Claude Code plugin，或 lint 既有 plugin / 整個 marketplace 是否符合房規時使用。

2026-06-17201

alcoa-guard

s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work

Use when checking a record / dataset / GMP document for ALCOA+ data integrity — attribution, contemporaneity (backdating), completeness, accuracy (recompute / in-spec), consistency — before a human approves. DEGRADED mode lints any CSV/JSON record against a declared .alcoa.json contract; FULL mode snaps onto an agentic-sop-kit run dir. ｜要檢查紀錄/資料/GMP 文件的資料完整性（ALCOA+：可歸屬、同步性/防 backdating、完整、正確、一致）時使用。輸出為 DRAFT，人擁有最終判定；確定性檢查只覆蓋可機械驗證的部分，其餘列為人判斷清單，絕不臆造。

2026-06-16201

agentic-sop

s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work

Use when turning a human SOP or manual process into an agentic workflow, building or adding an agent tool, or starting a new agent-workflow project — even if the user never says 'SOP' or 'methodology'. ｜要把人工流程／SOP 自動化、建立或新增 agent 工具、或開一個新的 agent 工作流專案時使用；只要意圖是把流程工程化成自動代理就觸發。不適用：稽核既有工作流是否退化成 mega agent（改用 agentic-workflow-audit）。

2026-06-12201

agentic-workflow-audit

s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work

Use when reviewing or auditing an existing agent / LLM-pipeline architecture — e.g. 'is my workflow actually decomposed or secretly a mega-agent?', 'are my task boundaries and success criteria right?' — even without the word 'audit'. ｜要檢視／review／稽核既有 agent 或 LLM pipeline 的架構，或問「有沒有拆好」「是不是變成 mega agent」「task 邊界／成功標準對不對」時使用；任何評估既有 agent 系統結構的請求都觸發。不適用：要新建或自動化流程（改用 agentic-sop）。

2026-06-12201

name

second-opinion

description

Second Opinion — adversarial honesty reviewer

When to use / not use

Use when: "get a second opinion on this report", "is this draft trustworthy / honest", "double-check the numbers before I sign", "red-team this output", "did it make anything up?"
Not for architecture ("is my workflow decomposed / a mega-agent?") → agentic-workflow-audit.
Not for source-code quality / bugs / security → /code-review, /security-review. Second Opinion reads a produced artifact's claims vs its cited evidence, in any domain.

What it catches (domain-neutral)

#1 wrong PASS/FAIL or spec-limit verdicts, and aggregates that don't recompute.
#2 numbers with no matching source token (fabrication / transcription error).
#3 invented identifiers / dates / names with no provenance (should be 【待補】).
#4 conclusions the data don't support (overreach) — advisory.

How it works (two layers; the guarantees are in CODE, not this prose)

Deterministic layer (stdlib, hermetic): catches #1/#2/#3. In FULL mode these are HARD at confidence 1.0 (the kit trace is authoritative); in DEGRADED mode they are SOFT at 0.5 (provenance reconstructed from supplied inputs).
Advisory LLM layer (you): catches #4 and fuzzy #1. It is capped (SECONDOP_MAX_LLM_PASSES, default 1) and every finding is clamped to SOFT / advisory / confidence ≤ 0.5, dropped unless it cites a verbatim draft span (or NO SOURCE), and suppressed if it re-litigates a slot the deterministic layer already settled.

To run it

Invoke the /second-opinion command, which orchestrates the deterministic pass → your capped advisory pass → the code-enforced fold-in → the human STOP. Modes:

/second-opinion <run_dir> — FULL (an agentic-sop-kit run dir)
/second-opinion <doc> --inputs <file...> — DEGRADED (any document)
/second-opinion — the bundled cross-domain demo

Iron rules

Facts only from inputs; unknowns are 【待補】; never invent numbers / IDs / dates / conclusions — and the red-team itself may not invent accusations (the evidence gate enforces this).
The deterministic checks are the only HARD signal; the LLM pass is advisory + capped, in code.
The report is a DRAFT. A human owns approve / reject. Never auto-approve, never auto-file.
Real enforcement lives in the code (clamp / evidence-gate / cap) and the optional Stop-hook — not in this prose.