You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
refactor: update learn skill to prefer general solutions over symptom-specific fixes
Added 'generality_analysis' guidance to phase-prevent.md that explicitly:
- Distinguishes root cause prevention from symptom-specific checks
- Asks whether the same failure could affect other files/systems
- Establishes preference order: general solution > process change > symptom check
- Provides example of STATE.md-specific check vs. general tree-building fix
This ensures future mistake analysis applies principles learned from this session.
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: plugin/skills/learn/phase-prevent.md
+23Lines changed: 23 additions & 0 deletions
Display the source diff
Display the rich diff
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -68,6 +68,27 @@ context_degradation_analysis:
68
68
69
69
```yaml
70
70
prevention_quality_check:
71
+
# FIRST: Check for general vs specific solutions
72
+
generality_analysis:
73
+
question: "Am I fixing the ROOT CAUSE or just this specific symptom?"
74
+
root_cause_example: |
75
+
Problem: Interactive rebase lost STATE.md changes during tree-building
76
+
❌ Specific fix: Check if STATE.md regressed from closed→open
77
+
✅ General fix: Use two-step approach (drop, then squash) for all files
78
+
79
+
# Ask: Could this failure affect OTHER files?
80
+
symptom_questions:
81
+
- "Is this failure specific to one data type (e.g., STATE.md)?"
82
+
- "Would the same root cause cause similar problems with other files?"
83
+
- "Would a different manifestation of the same root cause evade this check?"
84
+
85
+
# If root cause could affect multiple files → prefer general solution
86
+
# If specific symptoms, check if general prevention is achievable
87
+
preference_order:
88
+
1: "General solution that prevents the root cause for ALL files"
89
+
2: "Process change that eliminates risky operation entirely"
90
+
3: "Specific symptom check as last resort"
91
+
71
92
verification_type:
72
93
positive: "Check for PRESENCE of correct behavior"# ✅ Preferred
73
94
negative: "Check for ABSENCE of specific failure"# ❌ Fragile
@@ -100,6 +121,8 @@ prevention_quality_check:
100
121
101
122
**Decision gate:** If fragility is HIGH, redesign the prevention before implementing.
102
123
124
+
**General vs Specific Prevention Gate:** If prevention addresses only one symptom of a broader root cause, explore whether a general solution is achievable (e.g., process change, root cause elimination) before implementing the specific check.
0 commit comments