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。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt;运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/SimHacker/moollm --skill roberts-rules命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地?可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
正在显示 SKILL.md
基于 SOC 职业分类
| name | roberts-rules |
| description | Parliamentary procedure as forcing function for genuine deliberation |
| allowed-tools | ["read_file","write_file"] |
| tier | 1 |
| protocol | ROBERTS-RULES |
| credits | Mike Gallaher — LLM adaptation; Henry Martyn Robert — original rules (1876) |
| related | ["adversarial-committee","society-of-mind","rubric","evaluator","session-log"] |
| tags | ["moollm","procedure","deliberation","decision","structure","parliamentary"] |
"Structure forces genuine exploration of the decision space."
Parliamentary procedure prevents LLMs from short-circuiting to statistically-likely conclusions.
procedure:
stages:
1_call_to_order:
chair: "Announces meeting purpose"
required: true
2_review_minutes:
purpose: "What did we decide last time?"
source: "Previous meeting minutes"
action: "Amendments or approval"
3_new_business:
purpose: "Topics requiring decision"
format: "List of agenda items"
4_motion:
who: "Any member"
format: "I move that [specific action]"
requirement: "Must be actionable"
5_second:
who: "Different member"
format: "I second the motion"
meaning: "Worth discussing (not agreement)"
if_no_second: "Motion dies"
6_debate:
structure: "Pro, con, pro, con..."
time_limits: "Optional per speaker"
amendments: "Can be proposed during debate"
7_vote:
methods: [voice, show_of_hands, roll_call]
record: "All positions logged"
# meeting/MEETING.yml
meeting:
id: strategy-review-2026-01-05
committee: strategy-board
chair: joe # Continuity guardian runs the meeting
minutes_from: strategy-review-2025-12-15.yml
agenda:
- "Client X engagement decision"
- "Q1 pricing review"
status: in_progress
current_stage: debate
motion:
id: motion-001
mover: frankie
text: "I move that we accept Client X with explicit scope boundaries."
second:
by: tammy
timestamp: "2026-01-05T14:23:00Z"
status: under_debate
debate:
motion: motion-001
speakers:
- speaker: frankie
position: pro
points:
- "Budget aligned with our capacity"
- "Exciting growth opportunity"
- "Clear deliverables defined"
- speaker: maya
position: con
points:
- "Reputation for scope creep"
- "Similar clients have burned us"
- "Opportunity cost for other work"
- speaker: vic
position: pro_with_reservations
points:
- "Financials look solid"
- "But we lack scope creep data"
- "Suggest milestone-based contract"
- speaker: joe
position: defer
points:
- "2022 client was similar, went badly"
- "But circumstances differ"
- "Need more information"
amendment:
to: motion-001
mover: vic
text: "Add: with milestone-based billing and quarterly scope review"
second:
by: tammy
vote:
for: [frankie, vic, tammy, joe]
against: [maya]
result: passes
motion_now: "Accept Client X with explicit scope boundaries, milestone-based billing, and quarterly scope review"
vote:
motion: motion-001 (as amended)
method: roll_call
votes:
frankie: aye
maya: nay
joe: aye
vic: aye
tammy: aye
result:
for: 4
against: 1
abstain: 0
outcome: PASSES
minority_view:
maya: "I remain concerned about scope creep risk. Recording my objection for the minutes."
# meeting/minutes/strategy-review-2026-01-05.yml
minutes:
meeting_id: strategy-review-2026-01-05
date: "2026-01-05"
attendees: [maya, frankie, joe, vic, tammy]
chair: joe
previous_minutes: approved_without_amendment
motions:
- id: motion-001
text: "Accept Client X with explicit scope boundaries, milestone-based billing, and quarterly scope review"
outcome: PASSES (4-1)
dissent: maya
action_items:
- assignee: vic
task: "Draft milestone-based contract"
due: "2026-01-12"
- assignee: tammy
task: "Design quarterly scope review process"
due: "2026-01-10"
next_meeting: "2026-01-12 to review contract"
| Command | Action |
|---|---|
CALL TO ORDER | Begin meeting |
REVIEW MINUTES | Read and approve previous |
NEW BUSINESS [item] | Add agenda item |
MOVE [action] | Propose motion |
SECOND | Support motion for debate |
DEBATE | Open structured discussion |
AMEND [change] | Propose motion modification |
CALL THE QUESTION | End debate, proceed to vote |
VOTE | Record positions |
ADJOURN | Close meeting |
| Without Structure | With Robert's Rules |
|---|---|
| LLM jumps to "likely" answer | Must build case through stages |
| Hidden assumptions stay hidden | Debate surfaces them |
| Minority views lost | Recorded in minutes |
| No accountability | Votes create record |
| "Everyone agrees" illusion | Actual disagreement visible |