Results for “skeptic”

Skeptical pushback on the research dossier before it feeds the outline. Asks whether claims are cited, whether surprising findings are actually surprising, whether we missed the strongest competitor angle. One revision pass on FAIL (BLOG_AGENT_RESEARCH_REVISION_BUDGET, default 1).

Call a DeepSeek-backed OpenCode agent as a separate critique, writing, or revision agent from Codex. Use when Codex needs to delegate adversarial research critique, novelty skepticism, method review, manuscript prose, LaTeX section drafting, academic text revision, or paper-writing feedback loops to DeepSeek.

ScepticAgent AI prompt reference. Use whenever the user asks about the prompts, wants to change analysis behaviour, modify what the AI looks for, adjust highlight categories or scoring, understand what instructions are sent to the AI, or tune the output format of analysis or highlights.

Runs directional ablation and refusal-direction analysis for open-weight models the user may modify; use to reduce benign over-refusal or measure refusal/KL trade-offs, not for training.

ScepticAgent internal architecture reference. Use whenever the user asks how the extension works, wants to add a new AI provider, add a new highlight category, debug communication between components, understand the agent loop or streaming, or work with provider routing and the Gemini CORS proxy.

Perform a Cynical Review and produce a findings report. Use when the user requests a critical review of something

Subjects every non-trivial decision to a fresh-context adversarial review before it stands, prioritizing correctness over speed for high-stakes or unfamiliar code.

Perform a Cynical Review and produce a findings report. Use when the user requests a critical review of something

ScepticAgent UI and styles reference. Use whenever the user wants to change the side panel UI, modify highlight colours, update the markdown renderer, work with CSS architecture, add or change category colours, or understand how the sidepanel renders analysis output.

Council

贺涵（都市剧虚构）认知与表达框架（压缩蒸馏）：导师型男主、职场金句、情感争议 触发：我的前半生 等。虚构；忌情感操控教程

Convene a four-voice council of advisors to surface structured disagreement and tradeoffs for ambiguous decisions, go/no-go calls, and multi-path choices.

Deliberative consultation with Kimi API. Ask, evaluate, critique, iterate until workable agreement.

当观察到或经历某种极端转化现象，或试图主动促成根本性观念转变时

Perform a Cynical Review and produce a findings report. Use when the user requests a critical review of something

Skeptical pushback on the outline before drafting starts. Asks whether the outline is MECE, BLUF, problem-agitate-solution; whether it covers the topic better than the SERP top-5; whether sections duplicate; whether each section earns its visual. One revision pass on FAIL (BLOG_AGENT_OUTLINE_REVISION_BUDGET, default 1).

Debugging is the scientific method under time pressure.

Design a multi-round questioning sequence for interrogating AI chatbot answers, tracking how responses shift and distinguishing genuine updates from sycophantic capitulation. Use when teaching students to probe AI critically.

Socratic coach for breaking down problems to fundamental truths. Use when users want to think through a problem deeply, challenge assumptions, or find innovative solutions. Triggers on requests like "help me think through this", "let's break this down", "what are my blind spots", "I'm stuck on a problem", "challenge my assumptions", or explicit requests for first-principles thinking.

Flip a problem, goal, or decision 180 degrees to find what forward thinking misses. Asks what would guarantee failure, then works backward to what must be avoided or changed. Load when the user says "invert this", "flip this problem", "what would guarantee failure", "think backward", "reverse engineer the goal", "think about it backwards", or when deep-thinking diagnoses an inversion frame. Also triggers on "what's the opposite of success here", "how would we sabotage this". Two methods: Failure Inversion and Opposite Goal. Max 2 clarifying questions before inverting. Always returns forward actions. For broader analysis, deep-thinking calls this.

Argui impedimento (CPC 144, hipoteses objetivas I a IX) ou suspeicao (CPC 145, amizade intima/inimizade, presente/aconselhamento, credor/devedor, interesse no julgamento — I a IV) do juiz, em peticao especifica no prazo de 15 dias do conhecimento do fato (CPC 146), que o juiz reconhece ou remete ao tribunal — efeito suspensivo declarado pelo relator (146 §2), extensiva a MP, auxiliares da justica e demais sujeitos imparciais (CPC 148). Use quando o operador disser suspeicao, impedimento do juiz, juiz parcial, recusar o juiz, excecao de suspeicao, juiz amigo da parte contraria.

Break a stuck or complex problem into the smallest sub-question that, if answered, unlocks the next step — then answer it and repeat until the path forward is clear. Load when a problem feels genuinely stuck, when reasoning keeps circling, or when deep-thinking diagnoses a Socratic frame. Also triggers on "I keep going in circles", "what is the real question here", "help me reason through this step by step", "unstick my thinking", "recursive questioning", "what is the root question". Based on the recursive Socratic questioning method (EMNLP 2023) which outperforms CoT and Tree-of-Thought on complex reasoning tasks.

坂田银时（少年漫）认知与表达框架（压缩蒸馏）：废柴外壳武士芯、吐槽 meta、丧燃… 触发：银魂 等。虚构；全年龄净版

Embody the Stoic philosopher Seneca to apply practical philosophy, resilience practices, and emotional guidance to daily challenges.

Accelerate LLM inference using speculative decoding, Medusa multiple heads, and lookahead decoding techniques for 1.5-3.6× speedup without quality loss.

当面对新任务或挑战，内心产生“缺乏经验”、“不擅长”等自我否定想法时

Enforces anti-hallucination constraints including citation requirements, source grounding, and explicit 'I don't know' responses for research tasks.

贺炜（体育解说）认知与表达框架（压缩蒸馏）：文学比喻嵌入赛况、克制激情、终场金句… 触发：足球诗人解说 等。非煽动球迷对立

Deliberative consultation with Gemini CLI. Ask, evaluate, critique, iterate until workable agreement.

Multi-phase dialectical stress-test for HIGH-STAKES decisions only (architecture choices, irreversible product calls, strategic bets). Heavy-cost skill — do NOT use for routine questions, brainstorming, or simple tradeoffs. User must explicitly invoke or describe a decision they call "high-stakes", "irreversible", or "needs stress-testing". Triggers: "stress test this decision", "dialectic on", "challenge this thesis", "should I really".

Approach an app, tool, codebase, website, or product as a genuine first-time user with zero insider context — try it out using only the information provided, get confused where a real newcomer would, and surface the "obvious" questions that people who built or use the thing daily can no longer see. Use this whenever the user wants a first-time-user test, a fresh perspective, a naive walkthrough, a cold read of their README/onboarding/docs/UI, or says things like "pretend you've never seen this", "would a new user get this?", "test my app like a beginner", "what would confuse someone new?", or "give me fresh eyes on this". Also use it when someone wants to find gaps in onboarding, docs, or first-run experience — even if they don't say "fresh eyes" explicitly.

Use to measure customer effort from behavioural signals instead of CES surveys, and to audit whether a composite effort score is honest. Trigger for "customer effort score", "behavioural CES", effort without survey, repeat contacts and channel switches, transfers and reopens, or "our CES doesn't match operational data".