메뉴
Plan execution path, produce executable plan, dispatch subagents, collect and analyze results
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
SOC 직업 분류 기준
Strategy: Attack an isomorphism claim by demanding an explicit structure-preserving map and trying to break it. Targets any multi-language claim of the form 'X ≅ Y ≅ … across N mathematical languages'. Forces the claim to either earn the word 'isomorphism' or be demoted to 'analogy'. Methods: category theory (functor/natural-iso criteria), model theory, Lakatos monster-barring.
Strategy: Dialectic engine retuned for truth-seeking, not survival. A defender steelmans a claim into its MOST falsifiable form, a critic attacks to refute it, a judge classifies the exchange into BROKEN/CORROBORATED/UNFALSIFIABLE — the judge does NOT pick a winner or score persuasiveness. Methods: Irving debate (repurposed), Toulmin argumentation, Mayo severe testing.
Strategy: Run BEFORE building any validator (sandbox/simulation/benchmark). Builds a non-circularity matrix of theory-claim × validator-assumption to detect when a validator would 'confirm' a theory only because it was built on the theory's own premises. A circular validator's PASS carries zero evidential weight. Methods: Cartwright nomological machines, Winsberg sanctioning-of-simulations, tautology detection.
Strategy: Attack a beautiful unified result on the suspicion that its beauty is the bug. Distinguishes EARNED simplicity (forbids/predicts/subsumes) from DECORATIVE simplicity (re-describes/relabels/accommodates). Directly serves the Occam aesthetic by making it a falsifiable bar, not a vibe. Methods: Sober parsimony-as-evidence, MDL, Meehl risky prediction, accommodation-vs-prediction.
Campaign: Truth-seeking adversarial validation for scientific research artifacts (NOT publication defense). Core question: Where have we fooled ourselves, and is each load-bearing claim even falsifiable? Win-condition is INVERTED from survival/resilience to active refutation. Methods: Popper falsificationism, Lakatos Proofs and Refutations, Mayo severe testing, Platt strong inference.
Strategy: Attack the evidential weight of an 'independent convergence' claim. When N reasoning paths all reach the same conclusion, the confidence boost is real only if the paths were actually independent. Measures shared-prior / shared-blindspot contamination and corrects the over-counted confidence. Methods: Bayesian agreement-as-evidence, correlated-error analysis, jury theorem assumptions.
| name | implementation-planning |
| description | Plan execution path, produce executable plan, dispatch subagents, collect and analyze results |
| version | 1.0.0 |
| category | experiment-execution |
| type | campaign |
| strategies | ["critical-path-planning","prerequisite-planning","plan-writing","experiment-running","result-analysis"] |
| tactics | ["task-decomposition","subagent-execution-loop","checkpoint-and-recover","result-validation-loop"] |
| dependencies | {"strategies":["critical-path-planning","experiment-running","plan-writing","prerequisite-planning","result-analysis"],"tactics":["checkpoint-and-recover","result-validation-loop","subagent-execution-loop","task-decomposition"],"sops":["context-checkpoint","context-init","execution-synthesis","experiment-execution-paper-overview","experiment-execution-paper-research","experiment-execution-paper-search","experiment-execution-quality-gate-check","experiment-execution-saturation-detection","experiment-execution-web-research","experiment-execution-web-search","ponytail:ponytail","ponytail:ponytail-debt","ponytail:ponytail-review","superpowers:brainstorming","superpowers:executing-plans","superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch","superpowers:receiving-code-review","superpowers:requesting-code-review","superpowers:subagent-driven-development","superpowers:test-driven-development","superpowers:using-git-worktrees","superpowers:verification-before-completion","superpowers:writing-plans"]} |
Positioning: "How to do it + do it" — from validated experiment design to executed results.
Before entering this campaign, the following must be true:
If any gate fails, STOP and return to the appropriate upstream campaign.
Transform a validated experiment design into:
| Situation | Strategy | Key Question |
|---|---|---|
| Need shortest execution path | critical-path-planning | What is the shortest path? |
| Obstacles block direct execution | prerequisite-planning | What obstacles are in the way? |
| Ready to format executable plan | plan-writing | How to write it as an executable plan? |
| Plan ready, execute tasks | experiment-running | How to execute? |
| Results collected, need analysis | result-analysis | What do the results tell us? |
Typical flow: critical-path-planning → prerequisite-planning → plan-writing → experiment-running → result-analysis
| Phase | Max Budget | Checkpoint |
|---|---|---|
| Planning (strategies 1-3) | 20% of total | Plan document produced |
| Execution (strategy 4) | 60% of total | All tasks DONE or BLOCKED |
| Analysis (strategy 5) | 20% of total | Statistical report produced |
If any phase exceeds budget, STOP and report partial results.
Even if execution is partial, this campaign MUST produce:
本 campaign 的实现段（plan-writing → experiment-running → result-analysis）不自造，
而是直接 Skill load superpowers/ponytail 外部 skill 当 SOP。DARE 原生的排程
（CPM/PERT/TOC）与统计分析（bootstrap/ROPE/复现）夹在两端，是三明治：
排程层(DARE: CPM/PERT/TOC)
→ plan-writing: superpowers:brainstorming → superpowers:writing-plans
→ experiment-running: superpowers:using-git-worktrees
→ superpowers:executing-plans | superpowers:subagent-driven-development
→ superpowers:verification-before-completion
→ superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch
→ result-analysis(DARE: 统计 + 复现)
ponytail 三道 gate 贯穿执行段（硬接线进 dependencies，钉在前/后）：
| ponytail gate | 时机 |
|---|---|
| ponytail:ponytail | executing 之前载入（边写边精简） |
| ponytail:ponytail-review | code-review 之后载入（逐 diff 查过度工程） |
| ponytail:ponytail-debt | finishing 之前载入（收集欠债标记） |
舍弃（YAGNI）：ponytail:ponytail-audit（全库扫，错粒度）、ponytail:ponytail-help（速查卡）。
研究过程经 context-management 落盘，与最终报告分属不同文件：
implementation-planning，
建立本 campaign 的过程 context 文件。init 幂等——同 Phase 重入返回原文件。implementation-planning-report 文件落盘（见该 SOP）。Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| Strategy | When to use |
|---|---|
| critical-path-planning | Identify the shortest execution path via CPM forward/backward pass, resource leveling, and buffer insertion |
| experiment-running | Execute the plan by dispatching fresh subagents per task, monitoring status, and collecting results |
| plan-writing | Format critical path and prerequisites into bite-sized executable plan following superpowers:writing-plans conventions |
| prerequisite-planning | Identify obstacles blocking direct achievement and design intermediate objectives to overcome each |
| result-analysis | Statistically analyze collected results, verify reproducibility, and synthesize findings |
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| Tactic | When to use |
|---|---|
| checkpoint-and-recover | Checkpoint state before risky operations, detect anomalies, and recover gracefully |
| result-validation-loop | Validate results through statistical testing, ROPE judgment, reproducibility re-runs, and final synthesis |
| subagent-execution-loop | Orchestrate task execution via fresh subagents with dispatch, monitoring, and result collection |
| task-decomposition | Orchestrate the breakdown of experiment design into sequenced, estimated, and formatted task plan |
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| SOP | When to use |
|---|---|
| context-checkpoint | Append research process and results to the current Phase's context file. Each append MUST contain >=500 lines of markdown covering both process and results. Use this skill at plan-designated checkpoint points — typically after each strategy completes or at key decision nodes within a research Phase. |
| context-init | Create a new context file for a research Phase. Called once at Phase start to initialize the file that subsequent context-checkpoint calls will append to. Use this skill whenever a new research Phase begins and a fresh context file is needed. |
| execution-synthesis | Synthesize complete execution report from all results, tests, and reproducibility data |
| experiment-execution-paper-overview | Import SOP: paper landscape scan (from literature-engine skill) |
| experiment-execution-paper-research | Import SOP: paper full-text reading (from literature-engine skill) |
| experiment-execution-paper-search | Import SOP: paper AI summary reading (from literature-engine skill) |
| experiment-execution-quality-gate-check | Shared SOP: verify quality gate criteria are met before proceeding |
| experiment-execution-saturation-detection | Shared SOP: detect information saturation — know when to stop searching/analyzing |
| experiment-execution-web-research | Import SOP: deep full-page content analysis (from web-browsing skill) |
| experiment-execution-web-search | Import SOP: quick web scan discovery (from web-browsing skill) |
| ponytail:ponytail | Lazy-senior reflex: simplest thing that holds; mark every deliberate shortcut |
| ponytail:ponytail-debt | Harvest ponytail debt markers before finishing |
| ponytail:ponytail-review | Audit the diff for over-engineering (delete/stdlib/native/yagni/shrink) |
| superpowers:brainstorming | Turn the experiment design into an implementation spec (clarify -> approaches -> spec -> self-review -> user gate) |
| superpowers:executing-plans | Execute the plan task-by-task in the current session with checkpoints |
| superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch | Verify tests -> merge / PR / branch cleanup |
| superpowers:receiving-code-review | Verify review feedback before applying; push back when wrong |
| superpowers:requesting-code-review | Dispatch a code-reviewer subagent after each task |
| superpowers:subagent-driven-development | Execute the plan via a fresh subagent per task with two-stage review |
| superpowers:test-driven-development | RED -> GREEN -> REFACTOR per task |
| superpowers:using-git-worktrees | Create an isolated worktree + run baseline tests before implementing |
| superpowers:verification-before-completion | Run the proving command and confirm output before claiming done |
| superpowers:writing-plans | Produce a bite-sized, TDD-structured implementation plan from the spec |