thananon/9arm-skills

qwenchance

Keeps a long Claude Code task on-track — breaks out of looping/circular thinking, watches the context budget, bounds internal reasoning, and triggers a clean handoff before the window fills.

소스 보기

사용 방법

  1. 설치 명령을 복사하고 자신의 에이전트 환경에 설치하기 전에 소스 패키지를 확인하세요.
  2. 필요한 도구, 인증 정보, 지원 환경은 원본 문서에서 확인하세요.
  3. 입력과 원하는 산출물을 설명하고 출처와 결과를 대조하세요.
npx skills add https://github.com/thananon/9arm-skills --skill qwenchance

시작 전 확인

  • 설치에는 모델 구독, API 한도, 파일 접근 권한이 포함되지 않습니다.
  • 별점 수와 설치 수는 활동 지표이며 독립적인 품질·보안 검증이 아닙니다.
원본 Skill 문서

원본 저장소의 제목, 예시, 코드, 표, 링크, 이미지를 유지해 표시합니다.

Staying on Track

Long, multi-step work fails three ways: looping, over-thinking, and running out of context. Run the checklist below before each step. When a trigger fires, do the matching action — don't deliberate about it.

Before each step — run this

CheckTrigger fires when...Do this
Looping?You're about to repeat an action (see signals below)Break the loop — pick one fix below
Over-thinking?You've reasoned past ~1000 words without actingStop. Act on your current best decision, or ask the user one question
Context tight?A low-context reminder appeared, or 2+ budget signals holdFinish this step, then hand off

If nothing fires, take the step.

1. Loops — detect and break

A step is a loop if any of these is true:

  • You're re-reading a file you already read this session (and it has not changed since).
  • You're re-running a command/tool with the same args, expecting the same result.
  • You're returning to a hypothesis you already tried and dropped.
  • You're "reconsidering from the start" with no new evidence.
  • The last 2 steps gained no new information.

Re-reading a file you just edited is NOT a loop — that's verifying.

When a loop fires, stop and do exactly one:

  1. State the blocker in one sentence and ask the user a specific question.
  2. Write what you know vs. don't know, then take a different action than last time.
  3. Looped 2+ times on the same sub-problem? Declare it unsolved-for-now; move on or hand off.

Never repeat a failed action hoping for a different result.

Retry cap: never run the same failing command a 3rd time. Can't get something working (a command, a test runner, an import) after ~3 attempts — even varied ones — STOP and ask the user; don't grind through more variations.

Don't edit blind — it's the top loop source. Read enough to know the change is correct before editing. After each edit, verify it (read the diff / run it / run the test) before the next step. One edit → one check.

2. Thinking — keep it bounded

Cap reasoning at ~1000 words per step. Past that, you're deliberating instead of acting.

  • Decide → act → observe. Don't re-derive a decision you already made.
  • Can't decide in ~1000 words? The task is underspecified — ask the user one sharp question.
  • Don't restate the whole problem to yourself. Reference what you concluded; don't rebuild it.

3. Context budget — count signals, don't estimate

Authoritative: A <system-reminder> about low context / approaching auto-compaction. → Hand off now (section 4). Don't start new work.

Otherwise, count how many of these are true right now:

  • [ ] 20+ assistant turns into the task.
  • [ ] Read 5+ files, or any one huge file/log/dump.
  • [ ] Long tool outputs you keep scrolling back to.
  • [ ] 3+ plan steps still left.

Count the boxes that are true, then map the count to an action:

  • Count is 0 or 1 → CONTINUE working normally.
  • Count is 2, 3, or 4 → HAND OFF — finish the current step, then go to section 4.

Count first, then decide — don't judge by feel. A higher count means more context pressure, not less. Being on the last step or "almost done" does not lower the count or cancel a HAND OFF.

Before any expensive step (large read, new subtask, long generation), ask: "Room to finish this AND hand off after?" If the count says HAND OFF, finish the current atomic unit, then hand off — don't start the next.

4. Hand off cleanly

When context is tight or the user asks:

  1. Land durable artifacts first — save the file, commit, write the result. Nothing lost.
  2. Invoke the `handoff` skill to compact the conversation. Don't hand-write the handoff.
  3. Tell the user plainly: "Context is getting tight — handing off now; start a fresh session (/clear)."

관련 작업

같은 저장소의 Skills

더 많은 Skills

모든 Skills
thananon
커뮤니티

debug-mantra

Four-mantra debugging discipline — reproduce, trace the fail path, falsify the hypothesis, cross-reference every breadcrumb. Recite the mantra block verbatim at the start of any debugging session, then apply the four steps in order before proposing any fix. Trigger on /debug-mantra and proactively whenever debugging starts — user reports a bug, says something is broken/throwing/failing, asks to debug/diagnose/investigate an issue, or pastes a stack trace or error log.

설치 수
3
GitHub Stars
3.2천
업데이트
6월 14일
thananon
커뮤니티

scrutinize

Outsider-perspective end-to-end review of a plan, PR, or code change. First questions intent and whether a simpler/more elegant approach would achieve the same goal, then traces the actual code path (not just the diff) to verify the change does what it claims. Output is concise, actionable, and every call carries its rationale. Trigger on /scrutinize and proactively whenever the user asks to review, audit, sanity-check, or get a second opinion on a plan, PR, diff, design doc, or proposed code ch

설치 수
3
GitHub Stars
3.2천
업데이트
6월 14일
thananon
커뮤니티

management-talk

Rewrite engineer-to-engineer content for engineering-org leadership (VPs, directors, PMs, release managers, execs in an engineering-savvy company) and shape it for the channel it is going to — JIRA comment, Slack post, async standup line, email, or meeting talking-points. Trigger when the user asks to write/rewrite for management / exec / VP / director / PM / release manager, asks for an "executive summary / leadership update / status update", says "make this less technical / less jargony", or a

설치 수
2
GitHub Stars
3.2천
업데이트
6월 14일
thananon
커뮤니티

post-mortem

Write the canonical engineering record of a fixed bug — root cause, mechanism, fix, validation, and how it slipped through. Engineer-audience, code identifiers welcome. Use after a debug session lands a fix, before closing the ticket. Trigger on /post-mortem, when the user says "write the post-mortem / postmortem / RCA / root cause analysis", "document this fix", "write up the root cause", "close out this bug with a writeup", or hands you a fixed-and-validated bug and asks for the writeup.

설치 수
2
GitHub Stars
3.2천
업데이트
6월 14일