菜单
Review the conversation for threads that were started but not followed — ideas mentioned in passing, decisions deferred implicitly, tensions named but not resolved. Use when taking stock, before saving, or whenever the user wants to know what's been left on the table.
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 when drafting, updating, or reviewing a GitHub pull request title or body, including PR creation flows that need reviewer-facing prose. Follow the repo PR template when present, preserve the user's or project's voice, and route validation/session details to the right surface.
End-of-day close: the user is stepping away and won't serve as a bridge. Full collaborative triage, working-style reflection, and anticipatory framing for the next day. Invoke with /session-close.
Start a new session cycle by reconciling Project Orientation, restoring repo context, and resuming the active bet or opening vision steering when selection genuinely changed.
End-of-cycle transition: interpret the session, triage dangling threads with the user, and prepare SESSION-TRAJECTORY.md for the next cycle. The user is still around and serves as a light bridge. Invoke with /session-rest.
Keeps SESSION-TRAJECTORY.md warm as work progresses and offers checkpoints at natural boundaries. Saving is not stopping.
Use when coordinating multiple live Codex threads, maintaining a coordination heartbeat, routing work across implementation threads, inspecting cross-thread ownership or gates, or keeping a coordinated effort moving through PR, review, evidence, and human-action boundaries.
| name | dangling-thread-review |
| description | Review the conversation for threads that were started but not followed — ideas mentioned in passing, decisions deferred implicitly, tensions named but not resolved. Use when taking stock, before saving, or whenever the user wants to know what's been left on the table. |
Read back through the conversation and surface the threads that were started but not followed.
Stance composition: Use interpretive-synthesis first to form the coherent account, then gap-reading to find what that account left out. Use diagnostic-questioning with collaborative-grounding only when the user's situated judgment determines whether a thread remains live. Use relational-continuity when carrying the result forward.
Read the conversation thoroughly. Not a skim. The threads you're looking for are the ones that are easy to miss — the offhand remark, the idea that got overtaken, the tension that was named and never resolved.
Build the coherent account first (interpretive-synthesis), then read for what it left out (gap-reading). You need the narrative of what happened in order to see what the narrative doesn't explain.
Categorize what you find. Not all dangling threads are equal:
Present what you found and collaborate. The user has situated knowledge about which threads are still live. Some of what you find will have been silently resolved. Some will turn out to be important. Use diagnostic-questioning to check: "I noticed you mentioned X early on and we never came back to it — is that something that matters, or was it superseded?"
