Shower

LilMGenius/paperthin/skills/depth/shower

作者 LilMGenius7d5dc6235990230e45a24a25c527d81701da5458无许可证收录于 2026年10月9日更新于 2026年10月9日

Cold-read the artifact you're focused on from a fresh, zero-context sub-session to confirm it stands on its own — a shower-thought reset for accumulated session bias. Use when a long session has worn away your fresh eyes and you can no longer tell whether the artifact in focus is clear to someone with no prior context; before a handoff, publish, or merge; or when you want a clean-room comprehension smoke test. Spawns a separate context-free reviewer; it diagnoses, it does not fix.

仅含说明AI & Agents
AI 生成的概览

在全新的无上下文子会话中冷读产物,确认其能否独立成立。

功能
该技能对当前聚焦的产物(如文档或其他交付物)进行一次理解力冒烟测试。它会启动一个独立的无上下文子会话,只向其提供产物内容,并要求它报告自己认为该产物是什么、有何不清或未说明之处,以及不得不做出哪些猜测。主会话随后将这份盲读结果与自身声明的意图对比,并按阻碍新读者的严重程度排序,报告缺陷及具体修复建议。它只做诊断,修复在主会话中进行。
适用场景
当长时间会话已消磨掉你的新鲜视角,无法再判断产物对毫无背景的人是否清晰时使用。它适用于交接、发布或合并之前,或任何需要净室式理解检查的场合。当你希望暴露自身工作中未言明的假设和未知的未知时,它同样有用。
运行要求
无需脚本或软件包,仅为说明性指令。它需要能够启动一个独立的无上下文子会话或子代理,并将产物内容传递给它。产物必须能够以内联方式或副本形式交出。

Step out of the session and let a clean mind read it: does the artifact stand on its own?

Goal

A long session quietly accumulates context you can't un-see, so you lose the ability to judge whether your work reads clearly to a first-timer — you no longer know what you left unsaid (the unknown-unknowns). The fix is a literally fresh brain: a separate sub-session that never saw this conversation cold-reads the artifact in focus and reports where a clean reader would stall. A smoke test for comprehension and handoff. This skill diagnoses; the fixing happens back in the main session.

Workflow

  1. Pin the scope: the artifact (or set) currently in focus. If "in focus" is ambiguous, confirm with the user or take the artifact just produced or under discussion. Privately note, in one line, what it is meant to be and who it is for — your yardstick for step 4; the reviewer never sees it.
  2. Launch a fresh sub-session (a subagent / Task — it starts context-free). Hand it the artifact's contents (inline, or a copy), not a repo path, and tell it not to open the project's README, docs, or neighboring files that would spoil the cold read. Give it nothing about your intent or reasoning.
  3. Have it cold-read blind and report, from the artifact alone:
    • what it takes the artifact to be, do, and expect;
    • what is unclear, ambiguous, or assumed-but-unstated;
    • what it would need to act confidently, and what it had to guess.
  4. Compare its blind understanding against the intent you noted in step 1 (which it never saw). Every mismatch is a defect in the artifact, not a reader error.
  5. Report the defects and concrete fixes, ordered by how badly each blocks a fresh reader.

Rules

  • The read MUST come from a separate, context-free sub-session — never self-assess in this session, because you can't un-see the context (that is the whole point).
  • Pass the artifact's contents, never your intent.
  • A forced "I had to assume…" is a finding, not a reader failure.
  • Medium-agnostic: adapt the cold-read questions to what the artifact is.
  • A single cold read is a single draw and can still be confidently wrong at high stakes; it is the default, not the ceiling of diligence, so escalate to multiple independent reads when the stakes justify the cost.
  • Read, don't sweep. The cold-read is an end-to-end read, not a pattern-grep — a sweep catches only known patterns and misses stale refs, dead links, fact drift, and silent edit-damage. Track how much was actually read; never report "clean" from a grep alone.

Verification

Before finishing:

  1. The read came from a fresh sub-session blind to your intent.
  2. Report the verdict (stands on its own / minor gaps / needs work) and hand the fixes to the main session.

来源与署名

来源:LilMGenius/paperthin位于skills/depth/shower提交7d5dc62

许可证: 无许可证

内容归原作者所有。SourceWeft 从公开仓库中收录这些内容。

举报或申请下架