菜单
Prioritize contract gaps and verify findings — impact × effort, primary actor filter. Use when reconciling conflicts or ranking findings[].
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
Use only when explicitly invoked as lamina-design. Turn an incomplete product idea or brownfield change into a minimum sufficient product behavior graph: actors, entities, operations, workflows, rules, dependencies, decisions, persona perspectives, and distinct risks; then generate an implementation-ready contract.
Use only when explicitly invoked as lamina-init. Turn an incomplete product idea into usable business context and evidence-grounded personas, asking only high-leverage questions and labeling provisional assumptions for later product-graph design.
Product design workflows — domain contracts, implement brief, verify loop. Load via Read or Skill tool when /lamina-* workflows need it.
Use only when explicitly invoked as lamina. Route product design for developers building with AI — design, verify, or direct capability answers.
Use only when explicitly invoked as lamina-verify. Verify a live or brownfield product against its product graph: critical promises, reachable workflows, authority, invariants, state integrity, recovery, accessibility, and contract drift; emit evidence-backed fixes before merge.
Business context UX guidance. Use when bootstrapping Lamina for a project; answering business questions UX work needs; updating context after a pivot or scope change.
| name | lamina-decision-making |
| description | Prioritize contract gaps and verify findings — impact × effort, primary actor filter. Use when reconciling conflicts or ranking findings[]. |
| metadata | {"lamina":{"id":"decision-making","problems":["prioritizing findings","conflicting actor goals","analysis paralysis"],"related":["lamina-user-modeling","lamina-feature-prioritization","lamina-tradeoffs"]}} |
Rank contract changes and verify findings by impact on primary actor goals and invariants — output to decisions.md, sorted findings[], and fix.md sections.
Before writing fix.md, set fix_target on each finding in run.json:
| Signal | fix_target |
|---|---|
| Missing UI, bug, invariant violation on live product, a11y on existing screen | product |
| Scope change, new workflow/invariant, defer feature, contract wrong | contract |
Default: product when fix_target is unset. Product fixes belong in fix.md → coding session. Contract items belong in fix.md → /lamina-design delta prompt only.
Does this finding change a specific design or implementation decision? If not, dig deeper or drop.
| Impact | high | medium | low |
|---|---|---|---|
| Definition | Blocks workflow, invariant violation, primary actor stuck | Friction with workaround | Polish |
| Effort | high | medium | low |
|---|---|---|---|
| Definition | Cross-workflow contract change | Localized screen/scenario | Copy/label fix |
Sort: high impact + low effort first; then high impact + high effort. Record rationale in decisions.md.
When actors conflict:
decisions.md with rejected actor impact noted.Used when reconciling parallel persona panel outputs.
| Source | Weight |
|---|---|
| Invariant probe failure on live product | highest |
| Actor walk blocker (repro steps) | high |
| Walkthrough/repo grounding | medium |
| Assumption in design | low — mark to-verify |
Never rank invented analytics above reproduced actor failures.