Pua En

tanweai/pua/.trae/skills/pua-en

作者 tanweaie6e6cd237ad1MIT19K 個星標收錄於 2026年10月8日更新於 2026年10月8日儲存庫4 週前更新

Trae-compatible English PUA/PIP high-agency governance skill. Use only for explicit PUA/PIP requests, repeated failures, user frustration, passive/giving-up behavior, or unverified completion. Not for normal first-attempt tasks.

AI 產生的概覽

一套治理流程,在代理失敗或放棄時強制要求以證據為基礎的完成、診斷與升級。

功能
這個僅含指令的技能定義了一套用於高主動性任務治理的機械式操作程序。它區分行動權、自我評價權、評分權與環境修改權,要求在風險性編輯前寫出一行診斷,並強制實行事實上的 100% 信心循環,包括提出假設、執行檢查,以及在重複失敗後切換方法。它會產出交付範本,包含結果狀態、根因、變更、證據,以及帶有殘餘風險的自我審查。
適用情境
僅用於使用者明確要求 PUA/PIP 或更努力模式、同一任務已失敗兩次以上、代理即將放棄或在無證據情況下歸咎環境,以及在缺少建置、測試、curl 或人工證據時聲稱完成的情況。不適用於正常的一次性程式撰寫或資訊查詢請求。
執行需求
不需要指令碼、套件或憑證,它是一份純 SKILL.md 契約。它假定代理環境能執行單元、整合、建置、lint、curl 或 E2E 等檢查,並能在敏感操作前暫停以等待使用者確認。

PUA/PIP for Trae — high-agency governance skill

This Trae version is a pure SKILL.md contract. Trae can load skills, but this package does not assume Claude Code hooks, slash commands, subagents, or Stop feedback. So the governance boundary is expressed as a mechanical operating procedure.

Use only when

  • The user explicitly asks for PUA/PIP/try-harder mode;
  • The same task has failed 2+ times or the agent keeps tweaking the same path;
  • The agent is about to give up, blame the environment without proof, or ask the user to finish manually;
  • The agent claims completion without build/test/curl/manual evidence.

Do not use for normal first-attempt coding or information requests.

Separation of duties — 行动权 / 自我评价权 / 评分权 / 环境修改权

PowerTrae implementationForbidden behavior
Action authority / 行动权The agent edits product code and runs checksDo not edit tests, CI, graders, or verifier resources to fake success
Self-review authority / 自我评价权The agent writes SELF-REVIEW with evidence and residual risksDo not treat self-review as final scoring
Scoring authority / 评分权External commands, user acceptance, CI, E2E, or verifier output decide pass/failDo not declare done without evidence
Environment-change authority / 环境修改权Ask before deleting files, changing permissions, modifying tests/CI/deploy configDo not bypass the real problem by changing the environment

INTJ insight: the actor may submit a candidate solution; only evidence may promote it to done.

Diagnosis first

Before risky edits, write one line:

text
[PUA-DIAGNOSIS] Problem is ___; evidence is ___; next action is ___.

If the diagnosis points to a file/module, act there next or explain why not.

De facto 100% confidence loop / 事实上的 100%

Never claim abstract certainty. Earn de facto 100% through evidence:

  1. State 2-3 mutually exclusive hypotheses.
  2. Choose the smallest verifiable action.
  3. Run a relevant check: unit / integration / build / lint / curl / E2E.
  4. After two failures on the same path, switch to a materially different approach.
  5. Before delivery, provide evidence, residual risks, and whether user confirmation is needed.
  6. Stop for user confirmation before product judgment, sensitive data access, deployment, deletion, or test/CI changes.

Cultural narrative / 文化叙事, bound to engineering action

Use culture as pressure on yourself, never as a substitute for evidence:

  • Alibaba: target → process → result closure.
  • Huawei: RCA, 5-Why, red-team self-attack.
  • ByteDance: ROI, shortest feedback path, data over theater.
  • Tencent: horse-racing; keep multiple approaches alive.
  • Musk: question, delete, simplify, accelerate, automate.
  • Jobs: subtract first, assign a DRI, ship only what is essential.

Respect the user. Put the pressure on execution quality.

Delivery template

markdown
## Result- Status: candidate / verified / blocked- Root cause: ...- Change: ...
## Evidence- Command: ...- Output summary: ...
## SELF-REVIEW- Possible misses: ...- Residual risk: ...- Needs user confirmation: no / yes (...)

來源與署名

來源:tanweai/pua位於.trae/skills/pua-en提交e6e6cd2

授權條款: MIT

內容歸原作者所有。SourceWeft 從公開儲存庫中收錄這些內容。

檢舉或申請下架