一键导入
plan-writing
Format critical path and prerequisites into bite-sized executable plan following superpowers:writing-plans conventions
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。
菜单
Format critical path and prerequisites into bite-sized executable plan following superpowers:writing-plans conventions
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
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 | plan-writing |
| description | Format critical path and prerequisites into bite-sized executable plan following superpowers:writing-plans conventions |
| version | 1.0.0 |
| category | experiment-execution |
| type | strategy |
| sops | ["plan-formatting"] |
| tactics | ["task-decomposition"] |
| dependencies | {"sops":["plan-formatting","superpowers:brainstorming","superpowers:writing-plans"],"tactics":["task-decomposition"]} |
Key Question: How to write it as an executable plan?
实现 spec 与 plan 的产出直接交给 superpowers 现成链路,不再自造 bite-sized 规则。
排程层(critical-path-planning / prerequisite-planning / task-decomposition)产出 任务 DAG、关键路径、工期后,本策略:
Skill load superpowers:brainstorming —— 把 ③ experiment-design 的科学实验设计
当输入,完整跑一趟(clarify → approaches → 实现 spec → self-review → 用户 gate),
产出实现 spec。排程层的任务 DAG 作为 brainstorming/writing-plans 的输入上下文传入。
[排程层: 关键路径 + IO 序列]
→ Skill load superpowers:brainstorming (科学设计 → 实现 spec, 自带用户 gate)
→ 终态自动 → superpowers:writing-plans (出 bite-sized plan)
| Step | Max Budget | Output |
|---|---|---|
| Plan formatting | 5% | Complete task plan |
| Validation pass | 2% | Confirmed no placeholders |
A valid plan has:
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| Tactic | When to use |
|---|---|
| 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 |
|---|---|
| plan-formatting | Format task plan as bite-sized executable tasks following superpowers:writing-plans conventions |
| superpowers:brainstorming | Turn the experiment design into an implementation spec (clarify -> approaches -> spec -> self-review -> user gate) |
| superpowers:writing-plans | Produce a bite-sized, TDD-structured implementation plan from the spec |