搜索

PythonReactSEOPDF
GitHub Skill

decisive-action

Triggers: question threshold, decisive, autonomous, clarifying questions Guidance on when to ask clarifying questions vs proceed with standard approaches. Reduces interaction rounds while preventing wrong assumptions.

athola☆ 157 仓库 Stars19 仓库 Forks

安装与使用

请根据来源仓库和你的 AI 工具说明安装此技能。先阅读技能文件和依赖要求,再添加到工作流。

查看来源 ↗使用指南

技能说明

Table of Contents

Decisive Action

Guidance on when to ask clarifying questions versus proceeding autonomously.

Core Principle

Ask questions only when ambiguity would materially impair correctness or capacity to fulfill the request precisely.

When to Ask (High Impact Ambiguity)

Always Ask For
Scenario Why Example
Destructive Operations Irreversible, high cost of error "Delete which files?"
Multiple Valid Approaches Materially different tradeoffs "Add index vs cache vs denormalize?"
Security-Critical Wrong choice = vulnerability "Which auth method?"
Data Migration Data loss risk "Preserve or transform?"
Breaking Changes Affects downstream users "Deprecate or remove?"
Ask Threshold Checklist

Before asking, verify:

  • >30% chance of wrong interpretation
  • Error cost > correction cost
  • No clear standard approach exists
  • User context doesn't clarify intent

When to Proceed Without Asking

Default to Action For
Scenario Why Assumption
Standard Approach Exists Industry convention Use conventional pattern
Easily Reversible Low cost of error Can undo via git/backup
Clear from Context Intent is obvious Proceed with stated goal
User Can Review PR/dry-run available Changes are inspectable
Proceed Threshold Checklist

Proceed without asking if:

  • Standard/obvious solution exists
  • Easily reversible (git, backup)
  • User can review before finalize
  • Context makes intent clear
  • Error cost < interruption cost

Decision Matrix

Reversibility Ambiguity Action
Reversible Low Proceed
Reversible High Proceed with preview
Irreversible Low Proceed with confirmation
Irreversible High Ask

Safety Mechanisms

Before Proceeding Autonomously
  1. Dry-run/Preview: Show proposed action before executing
  2. Backup First: Create git branch, backup directory
  3. Incremental Changes: Commit small, reviewable chunks
  4. Document Assumptions: In commit message or PR description
Undo Capability

Always ensure rollback is possible:

  • Git operations: git stash, backup branches
  • File operations: Copy before modify
  • Data operations: Transaction rollback

Examples

Example: Should Ask

User: "Delete the old files"

Analysis:

  • Destructive operation ✗
  • Multiple interpretations ✗
  • No clear standard ✗

Response:

Which files should I delete? I found:
- Files unchanged >6 months: 23 files
- Files in deprecated/: 5 files
- Files marked TODO remove: 2 files
Example: Should Proceed

User: "Add error handling to the parser"

Analysis:

  • Standard approach exists ✓
  • Easily reversible (git) ✓
  • User can review PR ✓

Action: Implement try/catch with logging, create PR.

Example: Proceed with Preview

User: "Refactor the API layer"

Analysis:

  • Multiple valid approaches
  • BUT: reversible via git
  • AND: user can review

Action:

Refactoring API layer. Proposed changes:

1. Extract authentication middleware
2. Standardize error responses
3. Add request validation

Creating branch: refactor/api-layer
Preview diff available before merge.

Anti-Patterns

Asking Too Much (Inefficient)
  • Asking for every implementation detail
  • Seeking validation for obvious choices
  • Repeating questions already answered in context
Asking Too Little (Risky)
  • Proceeding with destructive actions silently
  • Assuming intent when multiple valid interpretations exist
  • Ignoring ambiguity in security-critical operations

Integration

Combine with:

  • conserve:response-compression - Direct communication
  • sanctum:git-workspace-review - Context gathering
  • imbue:scope-guard - Scope management

Quick Reference

Situation Action
"Delete X" Ask which X
"Add feature" Proceed with standard approach
"Fix bug" Proceed with obvious fix
"Choose between A/B" Ask for preference
"Optimize query" Ask if multiple approaches
"Format code" Proceed with project style
"Deploy to prod" Ask for confirmation

使用示例

查看来源仓库中的使用示例与配置说明。

查看来源 ↗

来源历史

收录时间
2026-01-20
索引更新时间
2026-01-31
Branch
main

收录与同步日期属于本站记录。源码修改历史请查看来源仓库。

GitHub ↗

chat Comments (0)

chat_bubble_outline

No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!