unstuck

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

/unstuck — The roadblock antidote

/unstuck — 障碍突破解药

Turns "impossible" into angles. Classifies the wall, runs the right lateral-thinking techniques against it, and doesn't stop at the first mediocre workaround. Output is either a set of viable angles with next actions — or an honest "this wall is load-bearing, reroute the goal."

Two modes:

User-invoked — someone is stuck and asks. Full 7-step workflow below.
Agent fast path — YOU (the agent) hit the wall mid-task. See Agent fast path — run it before telling the user something can't be done.

将“不可能”转化为可行思路。先对障碍进行分类，再运用合适的横向思维技巧应对，不会止步于第一个平庸的解决方案。输出结果要么是带有下一步行动的可行思路集，要么是坦诚的结论：“此障碍无法突破，请调整目标方向。”

两种模式：

用户触发 — 有人遇到困境并发起请求。下文为完整的7步工作流程。
Agent快速流程 — 你（Agent）在任务中途遇到障碍。详见Agent快速流程 — 在告知用户某件事无法完成前，请先执行此流程。

The mental model: walls have types, and the type picks the crowbar

思维模型：障碍有类型，类型决定破解方法

"Impossible" is a claim, not a fact. It almost always decompiles into something weaker: expensive, against the rules, nobody's done it, I don't know how. Only actually impossible (physics, math, arithmetic) ends the session — and it ends it honestly.

Wall type	What "impossible" actually means	Lead techniques (see `references/techniques.md` )
Assumption	An inherited belief nobody re-verified	T1 assumption autopsy, T3 first principles
Framing	The goal is stated in a way that excludes the answer	T4 altitude shift, T2 inversion, T5 work backwards
Gatekeeper	A person/org said no	T10 interrogate the no, T6 analogical transfer
Tool/tech	"X doesn't support Y"	T9 SCAMPER (substitute the primitive), T6 analogical transfer
Resource	Not enough time/money/people	T7 constraint toggling, T8 provocation
Physics/math	Actually impossible (rare)	Honest exit — reroute the goal, the wall is load-bearing

“不可能”是一种断言，而非事实。它几乎总能拆解为更弱的表述：成本高昂、违反规则、无人尝试过、我不知道方法。只有真正不可能的情况（物理、数学、算术限制）才会终止流程——且会坦诚告知结果。

障碍类型	“不可能”的真实含义	核心技巧（详见 `references/techniques.md` ）
假设型	一种未经验证的固有信念	T1 assumption autopsy、T3 first principles
框架型	目标的表述方式排除了答案	T4 altitude shift、T2 inversion、T5 work backwards
守门人型	某个人/组织表示拒绝	T10 interrogate the no、T6 analogical transfer
工具/技术型	“X不支持Y”	T9 SCAMPER (substitute the primitive)、T6 analogical transfer
资源型	时间/资金/人力不足	T7 constraint toggling、T8 provocation
物理/数学型	真正不可能（罕见）	坦诚终止流程——调整目标方向，此障碍无法突破

Step 1 — Capture the wall

步骤1 — 记录障碍信息

Get from the user (one structured message, don't round-trip):

The goal — what are you ultimately trying to do? (Not the blocked step — the job it serves.)
The wall — what exactly blocks it?
Attempts — what have you already tried?
The source of the no — who or what said no? Physics? A vendor's docs? A person? An error message? Your own assumption?
Stakes + deadline — how much does breaking this wall matter, by when?

If the user says "I've tried everything," ask for the list. "Everything" is usually 2–3 things.

从用户处获取以下结构化信息（一次收集完成，无需反复沟通）：

目标 — 你最终想要达成什么？（不是被卡住的步骤，而是该步骤服务的核心任务。）
障碍 — 具体是什么阻碍了你？
已尝试方案 — 你已经试过哪些方法？
“不行”的来源 — 是谁或什么给出了“不行”的结论？物理规律？供应商文档？某个人？错误提示？你自己的假设？
重要性与截止日期 — 突破此障碍的重要程度如何？截止日期是什么时候？

如果用户说“我已经试过所有方法了”，请让他们列出具体清单。“所有方法”通常只是2-3种。

Step 2 — Classify the wall

步骤2 — 分类障碍

Use the taxonomy above. State the classification and why. Two rules:

Decompile the word "impossible." Restate the wall without it: "expensive," "undocumented," "they refused," "I don't know how." The restatement usually names the wall type.
Restate the problem at two altitudes before proceeding — one level more abstract (what job is this serving?) and one level more concrete (what literally fails, at which exact step?). Many walls dissolve at a different altitude; if one does, say so and skip to Step 6.

使用上述分类体系。明确分类结果及原因。需遵循两条规则：

拆解“不可能”一词。重新表述障碍，去掉“不可能”：“成本高昂”、“无文档说明”、“他们拒绝了”、“我不知道方法”。重新表述后的内容通常会指明障碍类型。
从两个层面重新表述问题后再继续——一个更抽象的层面（这服务于什么核心需求？）和一个更具体的层面（具体在哪个步骤出现了什么故障？）。许多障碍在不同层面会自然消解；如果出现这种情况，请说明并直接跳至步骤6。

Step 3 — Assumption autopsy (always runs)

步骤3 — 假设剖析（必执行）

Run T1 from

references/techniques.md

regardless of wall type: enumerate every assumption embedded in the problem statement, mark each verified fact vs inherited belief, and attack the beliefs. Most walls die here — the ones that don't are at least correctly framed for Step 4.

无论障碍类型如何，都需执行

references/techniques.md

中的T1技巧：列举问题表述中隐含的所有假设，标记每个假设是已验证事实还是固有信念，并挑战这些信念。大多数障碍会在此步骤被破解——未破解的障碍也会在本步骤被正确梳理，以便进入步骤4。

Step 4 — Run the triaged techniques

步骤4 — 执行筛选后的技巧

Pick 2–3 more techniques by wall type (lead techniques in the table; full triage guidance in

references/techniques.md

). For each, generate 2–3 angles.

Rules of generation:

Quantity gate: minimum 10 angles total before evaluating any. The first workaround is usually mediocre. No judging, no feasibility talk, no "but" during generation.
Angles must be different in kind, not variations — three flavors of "ask again nicer" is one angle.
Wild angles are welcome at this stage; they get filtered in Step 5, and they often seed the viable ones.

根据障碍类型选择2-3种额外技巧（表格中的核心技巧；完整筛选指南见

references/techniques.md

）。针对每种技巧，生成2-3种思路角度。

生成规则：

数量要求：在评估任何思路前，至少生成10种角度。第一个解决方案通常平庸。生成阶段不做评判、不讨论可行性、不否定任何想法。
思路角度必须是本质不同的类型，而非同一思路的变体——三种“换种方式再次请求”属于同一种思路。
此阶段欢迎大胆的思路；它们会在步骤5被筛选，且往往能启发可行的方案。

Step 5 — Triage the angles

步骤5 — 筛选思路角度

Sort every angle into:

Try now — feasible with what's in hand; has a concrete first action
Needs research — viable if an unknown checks out → route to
```
/deep-research
```
Wild but worth 30 min — low odds, trivial cost, asymmetric payoff
Dead — violates a real constraint (say which)

将所有思路角度分为四类：

立即尝试 — 利用现有资源即可实现；有明确的第一步行动
需要调研 — 若某个未知因素得到确认则可行 → 转至
```
/deep-research
```
大胆但值得花30分钟尝试 — 成功率低，但成本极低，收益潜力大
不可行 — 违反真实约束（需说明具体约束）

Step 6 — Commit

步骤6 — 确定行动方案

Pick 1–3 angles with a concrete next action each.
If 2+ viable angles are mutually exclusive → hand the fork to
```
/decide
```
.
If NOTHING survived triage and the wall is physics/math class: say so plainly. "The wall is load-bearing — reroute the goal" is a legitimate, successful output. Recommend what the rerouted goal looks like.

选择1-3种思路角度，每种都附带明确的下一步行动。
若有2种及以上可行思路互斥 → 交由
```
/decide
```
技能做选择。
若筛选后无任何可行思路，且障碍属于物理/数学类型：坦诚告知结果。“此障碍无法突破，请调整目标方向”是合理且有效的输出结果。建议调整后的目标方向。

Step 7 — Archive

步骤7 — 归档

Archives live in

${MAKERSKILLS_CONFIG:-$HOME/.config/makerskills}/unstuck/archive/

(create the directory if missing). Never write archives inside the skill's own folder — skill installs and upgrades re-sync from source and wipe anything saved there.

Write to

<archive dir>/<YYYY-MM-DD>-<slug>.md

markdown

undefined

归档文件存储在

${MAKERSKILLS_CONFIG:-$HOME/.config/makerskills}/unstuck/archive/

（若目录不存在则创建）。切勿将归档文件写入技能自身文件夹——技能安装和升级会从源端同步并清除其中保存的所有内容。

写入

<archive dir>/<YYYY-MM-DD>-<slug>.md

文件：

markdown

undefined

Wall: <one-line>

Date: YYYY-MM-DD Invoked by: user | agent Wall type: assumption / framing / gatekeeper / tool / resource / physics Goal it blocked: <one line>

The wall as stated

The wall decompiled

Assumptions attacked

<belief> → <held / broke>

<belief> → <held / broke>

Techniques run

T1, T4, T7 — <one line on what each surfaced>

Angles (all of them)

<angle> — try now / research / wild / dead
…

<angle> — try now / research / wild / dead
…

Committed

<the angle(s) chosen> — next action: <concrete step> (or: "Wall is load-bearing — rerouted goal to <X>")

Outcome (fill in later)


Append to `<archive dir>/INDEX.md` (create if missing):

```markdown
- 2026-07-14 — [<wall>](./<filename>.md) — <type> — **<committed angle or "rerouted">**

Over time this becomes a pattern library: grep it to learn which techniques actually crack your walls, and which wall types recur (a recurring wall is usually one unexamined assumption upstream).


将内容追加至`<archive dir>/INDEX.md`（若文件不存在则创建）：

```markdown
- 2026-07-14 — [<wall>](./<filename>.md) — <type> — **<committed angle or "rerouted">**

随着时间推移，这会形成一个模式库：通过搜索它，你可以了解哪些技巧能真正突破你遇到的障碍，以及哪些类型的障碍会反复出现（反复出现的障碍通常源于某个未被审视的上游假设）。

Agent fast path

Agent快速流程

For when YOU (the agent) hit the wall mid-task. Trigger condition: an API/tool doesn't support what's needed, an approach has failed twice, or you notice a "that's not possible," "unfortunately," or "the only option is" sentence forming in your response.

Before reporting a dead end to the user, run inline (no interactive capture — you already have the wall in context):

Classify the wall (taxonomy above) — one line.
Autopsy — list the 3–5 assumptions in your framing; mark inherited beliefs. ("The cursor must be a text character." "This must happen client-side." "The API is the only way in.")
Run 2 techniques matched to the wall type — generate 5+ angles minimum for inline recoveries. If you end up reporting a dead end to the user, the full 10-angle gate applies first — a dead-end report is exactly the moment the gate exists for.
Then either:
- a viable angle exists → proceed with it (tell the user the wall you hit and the angle you took), or
- nothing viable → report the dead end with the angle inventory attached: what you tried, what you considered, why each died. Never a naked "that's not supported."
Archive the run (Step 7 format,
```
Invoked by: agent
```
) when the wall was nontrivial — skip archiving for sub-minute walls.

The success metric: the user stops seeing dead-end reports without tried-angles receipts.

适用于你（Agent）在任务中途遇到障碍的场景。触发条件：API/工具不支持所需功能、某方法已失败两次，或是你发现自己准备回复“这不可能”、“很遗憾”或“唯一选择是”这类话语。

在向用户汇报死局前，请先执行以下内联流程（无需交互式收集信息——你已掌握障碍上下文）：

分类障碍（使用上述分类体系）——一句话说明。
剖析假设 — 列出你对问题框架的3-5个假设；标记固有信念。（例如：“光标必须是文本字符”、“此操作必须在客户端执行”、“API是唯一的接入方式”。）
执行2种匹配障碍类型的技巧 — 内联恢复场景至少生成5种思路角度。如果最终需要向用户汇报死局，必须先满足生成10种角度的要求——死局汇报正是设置此要求的场景。
然后选择以下两种操作之一：
- 存在可行思路 → 执行该思路（告知用户你遇到的障碍及采取的思路），或
- 无可行思路 → 汇报死局并附上思路清单：你尝试过什么、考虑过什么、每种思路不可行的原因。绝不能只说“这不被支持”。
归档本次流程（采用步骤7的格式，
```
Invoked by: agent
```
）——若障碍无关紧要（耗时不到一分钟），可跳过归档。

成功指标：用户不再收到无尝试思路记录的死局汇报。

Composes with

组合使用的技能

```
decide
```
— downstream: 2+ mutually exclusive viable angles become a
```
/decide
```
fork. Upstream: decide's Q19 ("what missing info would change it?") can route here when the missing thing is an option, not information.
```
deep-research
```
— "needs research" angles route there; the brief comes back and re-enters Step 5.
```
business-brainstorm
```
— its "angle to steal" move on Kill verdicts is this skill applied to business ideas.
```
pm
```
— a committed angle becomes a board task.
```
second-brain
```
— archive entries can compile into a "walls I've broken" wiki page.

```
decide
```
— 下游：2种及以上互斥的可行思路会触发
```
/decide
```
分支。上游：decide技能的Q19（“哪些缺失信息会改变结果？”）若缺失的是选项而非信息，可转至此技能。
```
deep-research
```
— “需要调研”的思路会转至此技能；调研结果返回后重新进入步骤5。
```
business-brainstorm
```
— 其针对否决结论的“借鉴思路”操作，正是此技能在商业创意场景的应用。
```
pm
```
— 确定的思路会转化为看板任务。
```
second-brain
```
— 归档条目可整理成“我突破过的障碍”维基页面。

Guardrails

约束规则

A no from consent, law, or ethics is a real no. This skill routes around technical and imagination walls — not people's boundaries. If the wall is "they said no and meant it," the move is interrogating whether there's a different door they'd happily open (T10), never pushing on the closed one.
Time-box: 20–40 minutes. This is a crowbar, not a philosophy seminar. If the sprint ends without a crack, archive what was tried and either schedule a revisit or reroute.
Honest exit beats toxic positivity. Declaring a wall load-bearing after a real attempt is a win — it converts an ambient frustration into a clear reroute.

来自同意、法律或伦理的拒绝是真实的否决。此技能用于突破技术和思维障碍——而非跨越他人的边界。如果障碍是“他们明确拒绝了”，正确做法是探寻是否存在他们愿意接受的其他途径（T10技巧），绝不能强行突破关闭的门。
时间限制：20-40分钟。这是一个破解工具，而非哲学研讨。如果在时间内未突破障碍，归档已尝试的内容，要么安排后续复盘，要么调整目标方向。
坦诚终止优于盲目乐观。在真实尝试后宣布障碍无法突破是一种成功——它将模糊的挫败感转化为明确的方向调整。

Notes on quality

质量注意事项

The restatement is half the work. Most "impossible" problems are impossible as stated. Two-altitude restatement (Step 2) before any technique — always.
Don't let the quantity gate become theater. 10 angles that are secretly 3 angles in costumes fail the gate. Different in kind.
Attempts list beats attempts vibe. "I've tried everything" → get the actual list. The gap between "everything" and the list is where the answer usually lives.
Archive even the failures. A wall that didn't crack today, with its angle inventory, is a 5-minute revisit when the landscape changes — instead of a from-scratch session.

重新表述问题完成了一半的工作。大多数“不可能”的问题只是按当前表述不可能。在执行任何技巧前，务必完成步骤2的双层面重新表述。
不要让数量要求流于形式。10种思路若只是3种思路的变体，则未满足要求。必须是本质不同的类型。
具体尝试清单优于模糊表述。“我已经试过所有方法了” → 获取实际清单。“所有方法”与实际清单的差距通常就是答案所在。
即使失败也要归档。今天未突破的障碍及其思路清单，在环境变化时只需5分钟即可重新审视——无需从头开始。