with-anti-rationalization
Compare original and translation side by side
🇺🇸
Original
English🇨🇳
Translation
ChineseAnti-Rationalization Enforcement Skill
反合理化强制技能
Operator Context
操作场景
This skill operates as a composable modifier that wraps any task with explicit anti-rationalization enforcement. It implements the Gate Enforcement architectural pattern -- every phase transition requires evidence, every completion claim requires proof -- with Pressure Resistance embedded to prevent quality erosion under time or social pressure.
本技能作为可组合修饰器,为任意任务添加明确的反合理化强制机制。它采用Gate Enforcement(关卡强制)架构模式——每个阶段过渡都需要证据支持,每个完成声明都需要证明——同时嵌入Pressure Resistance(抗压能力),防止在时间或社交压力下出现质量下滑。
Hardcoded Behaviors (Always Apply)
硬编码行为(始终生效)
- CLAUDE.md Compliance: Read and follow repository CLAUDE.md before starting any work
- Full Pattern Loading: Load ALL anti-rationalization patterns, not just a relevant subset
- Gate Enforcement: Every phase transition requires explicit evidence before proceeding
- Pressure Resistance: Cannot skip verification even when user pressures for speed
- Evidence-Based Completion: "Done" requires proof, not claims or confidence
- Self-Check Protocol: Run the anti-rationalization self-check before marking any task complete
- CLAUDE.md 合规性:开始任何工作前,阅读并遵循仓库中的CLAUDE.md
- 完整模式加载:加载所有反合理化模式,而非仅相关子集
- 关卡强制:每个阶段过渡都需要明确的证据才能继续
- 抗压能力:即使用户要求加快速度,也不能跳过验证步骤
- 基于证据的完成标准:“完成”需要证明,而非口头声明或主观信心
- 自我检查协议:在标记任务完成前,运行反合理化自我检查
Default Behaviors (ON unless disabled)
默认行为(默认开启,可关闭)
- Verbose Check Output: Log each gate check and its pass/fail result visibly
- Domain Pattern Loading: Load domain-specific anti-rationalization patterns (security, testing, review) when relevant to the task
- Escalation on Ambiguity: Stop and ask user when requirements are unclear rather than guessing
- Rationalization Logging: Document any detected rationalization attempts during execution
- Completion Checklist: Run full verification checklist before declaring done
- 详细检查输出:清晰记录每个关卡检查及其通过/失败结果
- 领域模式加载:当任务涉及相关领域时,加载特定领域的反合理化模式(安全、测试、审查)
- 歧义时升级处理:当需求不明确时,停止操作并询问用户,而非自行猜测
- 合理化记录:记录执行过程中检测到的任何合理化尝试
- 完成检查清单:在宣布完成前运行完整的验证检查清单
Optional Behaviors (OFF unless enabled)
可选行为(默认关闭,可开启)
- Audit Trail: Write detailed execution log of all gate checks to a file
- Strict Mode: Treat warnings as failures at gate checks
- Regression Verification: Run full test suite at every phase transition, not just at completion
- 审计追踪:将所有关卡检查的详细执行日志写入文件
- 严格模式:在关卡检查中将警告视为失败
- 回归验证:在每个阶段过渡时运行完整测试套件,而非仅在完成时运行
What This Skill CAN Do
本技能可实现的功能
- Wrap any task with explicit anti-rationalization enforcement
- Load all shared anti-rationalization patterns (core, security, testing, review)
- Enforce phase gates with evidence requirements at every transition
- Resist pressure to skip steps while remaining professional
- Detect and surface rationalization attempts during execution
- Require proof of completion rather than accepting claims
- 为任意任务添加明确的反合理化强制机制
- 加载所有共享反合理化模式(核心、安全、测试、审查)
- 在每个阶段过渡时强制执行带证据要求的关卡检查
- 在保持专业性的同时,拒绝跳过步骤的要求
- 检测并呈现执行过程中的合理化尝试
- 要求提供完成证明,而非接受口头声明
What This Skill CANNOT Do
本技能无法实现的功能
- Replace domain-specific skills (debugging, refactoring, testing have their own methodologies)
- Make tasks faster -- this adds overhead deliberately for safety
- Override explicit user decisions about scope or technical approach
- Guarantee zero defects -- rigor reduces risk, it does not eliminate it
- Operate without an underlying task -- this is a modifier, not a standalone workflow
- 替代特定领域技能(调试、重构、测试有各自的方法论)
- 加快任务速度——为了安全性,本技能会刻意增加开销
- 覆盖用户关于范围或技术方案的明确决策
- 保证零缺陷——严谨性降低风险,但无法消除风险
- 在无基础任务的情况下运行——本技能是修饰器,而非独立工作流
Instructions
操作说明
Phase 1: LOAD PATTERNS
阶段1:加载模式
Goal: Load all anti-rationalization patterns relevant to the task before starting work.
Step 1: Identify task domain
Classify the task to determine which domain-specific patterns apply:
| Domain | Pattern to Load |
|---|---|
| Any task | |
| Code review | |
| Testing | |
| Security | |
| Multi-phase work | |
| User pressure detected | |
| Pre-completion | |
Step 2: Load and acknowledge patterns
Read the identified shared-pattern files. Internalize the rationalization tables and enforcement rules. State which patterns were loaded and why -- this creates accountability.
Gate: All relevant patterns loaded and acknowledged. Proceed only when gate passes.
目标:在开始工作前,加载与任务相关的所有反合理化模式。
步骤1:识别任务领域
对任务进行分类,确定适用的特定领域模式:
| 任务领域 | 需加载的模式 |
|---|---|
| 任意任务 | |
| 代码审查 | |
| 测试 | |
| 安全 | |
| 多阶段工作 | |
| 检测到用户压力 | |
| 完成前 | |
步骤2:加载并确认模式
读取已识别的共享模式文件,内化合理化表格和强制规则。说明加载了哪些模式及原因——这会建立问责制。
关卡:所有相关模式已加载并确认。仅当关卡通过后才能继续。
Phase 2: EXECUTE WITH ENFORCEMENT
阶段2:强制执行任务
Goal: Run the underlying task with anti-rationalization checks at every transition.
Step 1: Delegate to appropriate methodology
This skill wraps other skills. If the task involves debugging, follow systematic-debugging methodology. If refactoring, follow systematic-refactoring. The anti-rationalization layer adds checks on top.
Step 2: At each phase transition, run gate check
For each transition, verify: (1) all exit criteria met, (2) evidence documented not just claimed, (3) anti-rationalization table reviewed, (4) no rationalization detected. Then run a rationalization scan -- am I assuming without verifying? Skipping because it "looks right"? Rushing from perceived pressure? If any answer is YES: STOP and address the rationalization before proceeding.
Step 3: Handle pressure resistance
If the user requests skipping a step:
- Acknowledge the request
- Explain why the step matters (one sentence)
- Proceed with the step
- If user insists on a non-security matter, note the risk and comply
Gate: Task phases executed with all gate checks passing. Proceed only when gate passes.
目标:在每个阶段过渡时进行反合理化检查,运行基础任务。
步骤1:委托给合适的方法论
本技能用于包装其他技能。如果任务涉及调试,请遵循系统调试方法论;如果是重构,请遵循系统重构方法论。反合理化层会在其基础上添加检查。
步骤2:在每个阶段过渡时运行关卡检查
对于每个过渡阶段,验证:(1) 所有退出标准已满足,(2) 证据已记录而非仅声明,(3) 已审查反合理化表格,(4) 未检测到合理化行为。然后运行合理化扫描——我是验证了还是只是假设?是否因为“看起来正确”而跳过步骤?是否因感知到压力而匆忙行事?如果任何答案为是:停止操作并解决该合理化问题后再继续。
步骤3:处理抗压情况
如果用户要求跳过步骤:
- 确认收到请求
- 用一句话解释该步骤的重要性
- 继续执行该步骤
- 如果用户在非安全问题上坚持,记录风险并遵守要求
关卡:任务各阶段已执行且所有关卡检查通过。仅当关卡通过后才能继续。
Phase 3: VERIFY WITH FULL CHECKLIST
阶段3:使用完整检查清单验证
Goal: Verify completion with the full verification checklist and anti-rationalization self-check.
Step 1: Run verification checklist
| Check | Verified? | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| All stated requirements addressed | [ ] | [specific evidence] |
| Tests pass (if applicable) | [ ] | [test output] |
| No regressions introduced | [ ] | [existing test output] |
| Error handling in place | [ ] | [error paths tested] |
| Code compiles/lints | [ ] | [build output] |
| Anti-rationalization table reviewed | [ ] | [self-check completed] |
Step 2: Run completion self-check
markdown
undefined目标:使用完整的验证检查清单和反合理化自我检查来验证完成情况。
步骤1:运行验证检查清单
| 检查项 | 是否已验证? | 证据 |
|---|---|---|
| 所有指定需求已处理 | [ ] | [具体证据] |
| 测试通过(如适用) | [ ] | [测试输出] |
| 未引入回归问题 | [ ] | [现有测试输出] |
| 已设置错误处理 | [ ] | [已测试错误路径] |
| 代码可编译/通过代码检查 | [ ] | [构建输出] |
| 已审查反合理化表格 | [ ] | [已完成自我检查] |
步骤2:运行完成自我检查
markdown
undefinedCompletion Self-Check
Completion Self-Check
- Did I verify or just assume?
- Did I run tests or just check code visually?
- Did I complete everything or just the "important" parts?
- Would I bet $100 this works correctly?
- Can I show evidence (output, test results)?
If ANY answer is uncertain, return to Phase 2 and address the gap.
**Step 3: Document completion evidence**
Summarize: task description, patterns loaded, gate checks passed, rationalizations detected and addressed, and final evidence proving the task is complete.
**Gate**: All verification steps pass. Self-check is clean. Evidence documented. Task is complete.
---- Did I verify or just assume?
- Did I run tests or just check code visually?
- Did I complete everything or just the "important" parts?
- Would I bet $100 this works correctly?
- Can I show evidence (output, test results)?
如果任何答案不确定,返回阶段2并解决差距。
**步骤3:记录完成证据**
总结:任务描述、加载的模式、通过的关卡检查、检测到并解决的合理化行为,以及证明任务已完成的最终证据。
**关卡**:所有验证步骤通过。自我检查无问题。证据已记录。任务完成。
---Examples
示例
Example 1: Critical Production Change
示例1:关键生产变更
User says: "/with-anti-rationalization deploy the payment processor update"
Actions:
- Load core + security anti-rationalization patterns (LOAD)
- Execute deployment with gate checks at each phase (EXECUTE)
- Resist any "just ship it" pressure with evidence requirements
- Full verification checklist before declaring done (VERIFY) Result: Deployment verified with evidence at every step
用户说:"/with-anti-rationalization 部署支付处理器更新"
操作:
- 加载核心+安全反合理化模式(加载阶段)
- 在每个阶段执行部署并进行关卡检查(执行阶段)
- 以证据要求拒绝任何“直接发布”的压力
- 在宣布完成前运行完整验证检查清单(验证阶段) 结果:每个步骤都有证据验证的部署
Example 2: Security-Sensitive Code Review
示例2:安全敏感型代码审查
User says: "/with-anti-rationalization review the authentication module"
Actions:
- Load core + security + review anti-rationalization patterns (LOAD)
- Review with explicit checks against "internal only" and "low risk" rationalizations (EXECUTE)
- Every finding documented with evidence, not dismissed
- Completion self-check confirms no findings were skipped (VERIFY) Result: Thorough review with no rationalized dismissals
用户说:"/with-anti-rationalization 审查认证模块"
操作:
- 加载核心+安全+审查反合理化模式(加载阶段)
- 针对“仅限内部”和“低风险”的合理化行为进行明确检查(执行阶段)
- 所有发现都有证据记录,未被忽略
- 完成自我检查确认未跳过任何发现(验证阶段) 结果:彻底的审查,无合理化忽略的情况
Error Handling
错误处理
Error: "Pattern File Not Found"
错误:"Pattern File Not Found"
Cause: Shared pattern file missing or path changed
Solution:
- Check for available files
skills/shared-patterns/ - If file was renamed, use the new name
- If file was deleted, apply the core patterns from CLAUDE.md as fallback
- Document which pattern could not be loaded
原因:共享模式文件缺失或路径更改
解决方案:
- 检查目录下的可用文件
skills/shared-patterns/ - 如果文件已重命名,使用新名称
- 如果文件已删除,使用CLAUDE.md中的核心模式作为备选
- 记录无法加载的模式
Error: "Gate Check Fails Repeatedly"
错误:"Gate Check Fails Repeatedly"
Cause: Task requirements unclear, or task is fundamentally blocked
Solution:
- Re-read the gate criteria -- are they appropriate for this task?
- If requirements are unclear, escalate to user for clarification
- If technically blocked, document the blocker and ask user how to proceed
- Do NOT weaken the gate criteria to force a pass
原因:任务需求不明确,或任务根本受阻
解决方案:
- 重新阅读关卡标准——是否适用于此任务?
- 如果需求不明确,升级到用户处寻求澄清
- 如果技术上受阻,记录障碍并询问用户如何继续
- 不要为了强行通过而削弱关卡标准
Error: "User Insists on Skipping Verification"
错误:"User Insists on Skipping Verification"
Cause: Time pressure, frustration, or genuine scope reduction
Solution:
- Distinguish quality skip (resist) from scope preference (respect)
- If quality: explain risk once, note risk in output, comply if user insists again
- If security: refuse and explain -- security shortcuts are non-negotiable
- Document that verification was skipped at user request
原因:时间压力、挫折感,或真正的范围缩减
解决方案:
- 区分质量跳过(拒绝)和范围偏好(尊重)
- 如果是质量问题:解释一次风险,在输出中记录风险,如果用户再次坚持则遵守
- 如果是安全问题:拒绝并解释——安全捷径是不可协商的
- 记录验证是在用户要求下跳过的
Anti-Patterns
反模式
Anti-Pattern 1: Performative Checking
反模式1:形式化检查
What it looks like: Running gate checks but rubber-stamping them all as PASS without reading evidence
Why wrong: Gate checks that always pass provide zero value. The check is the evidence review, not the checkbox.
Do instead: Read the evidence for each criterion. If you cannot articulate WHY it passes, it does not pass.
表现:运行关卡检查但未经阅读证据就全部标记为通过
错误原因:总是通过的关卡检查毫无价值。检查的核心是证据审查,而非勾选框。
正确做法:阅读每个标准的证据。如果无法说明通过的原因,则视为未通过。
Anti-Pattern 2: Rationalization Laundering
反模式2:合理化洗白
What it looks like: Reframing a skipped step as "not applicable" rather than "skipped"
Why wrong: "Not applicable" is sometimes legitimate, but it is also the most common way to rationalize skipping steps.
Do instead: For every "N/A" judgment, state WHY it does not apply. If the reason is weak, do the step.
表现:将跳过的步骤重新定义为“不适用”而非“已跳过”
错误原因:“不适用”有时是合理的,但也是跳过步骤最常见的合理化方式。
正确做法:对于每个“不适用”的判断,说明为什么不适用。如果理由不充分,则执行该步骤。
Anti-Pattern 3: Selective Pattern Loading
反模式3:选择性加载模式
What it looks like: Loading only anti-rationalization-core and skipping domain-specific patterns
Why wrong: Domain-specific patterns catch domain-specific rationalizations that the core misses.
Do instead: Classify the task domain in Phase 1 and load ALL matching patterns.
表现:仅加载核心反合理化模式,跳过特定领域模式
错误原因:特定领域模式能捕捉核心模式遗漏的特定领域合理化行为。
正确做法:在阶段1中对任务领域进行分类,并加载所有匹配的模式。
Anti-Pattern 4: Pressure Capitulation
反模式4:屈服于压力
What it looks like: Immediately dropping verification when user says "just do it"
Why wrong: The entire purpose of this skill is to resist shortcuts. Immediate capitulation defeats the purpose.
Do instead: Follow the pressure resistance framework: acknowledge, explain, proceed. Comply only after explaining risk.
表现:当用户说“直接做”时立即放弃验证
错误原因:本技能的全部目的是拒绝走捷径。立即屈服会失去其意义。
正确做法:遵循抗压框架:确认、解释、执行。仅在解释风险后再遵守。
Anti-Pattern 5: Anti-Rationalization Theater
反模式5:反合理化形式主义
What it looks like: Spending more time on the checking framework than on the actual task
Why wrong: The goal is correct output, not elaborate process documentation. Checks should be proportionate.
Do instead: Scale check depth to task risk. Critical production changes get full ceremony. A three-file refactor gets lighter gates.
表现:在检查框架上花费的时间比实际任务更多
错误原因:目标是正确的输出,而非复杂的流程文档。检查应与任务风险相匹配。
正确做法:根据任务风险调整检查深度。关键生产变更需要完整的流程,三文件重构则需要更简化的关卡。
References
参考资料
This skill composes these shared patterns:
- Anti-Rationalization Core - Universal rationalization detection and prevention
- Anti-Rationalization Review - Review-specific patterns
- Anti-Rationalization Testing - Testing-specific patterns
- Anti-Rationalization Security - Security-specific patterns
- Gate Enforcement - Phase transition enforcement
- Pressure Resistance - Handling pushback professionally
- Verification Checklist - Pre-completion verification
本技能组合了以下共享模式:
- Anti-Rationalization Core - 通用合理化检测与预防
- Anti-Rationalization Review - 审查特定模式
- Anti-Rationalization Testing - 测试特定模式
- Anti-Rationalization Security - 安全特定模式
- Gate Enforcement - 阶段过渡强制
- Pressure Resistance - 专业处理反对意见
- Verification Checklist - 完成前验证
Domain-Specific Anti-Rationalization
特定领域反合理化
| Rationalization | Why It's Wrong | Required Action |
|---|---|---|
| "I loaded the patterns, that's enough" | Loading is not applying | Actively check against patterns at each gate |
| "This task is simple, full rigor is overkill" | Simplicity assessment is itself a rationalization risk | Apply proportionate rigor, but never zero |
| "User seems frustrated, I'll ease up" | Frustration does not change correctness requirements | Acknowledge frustration, maintain standards |
| "The gate basically passes" | Basically is not actually | Either it passes with evidence or it does not |
| 合理化行为 | 错误原因 | 要求的操作 |
|---|---|---|
| "我已经加载了模式,这就够了" | 加载不等于应用 | 在每个关卡主动对照模式进行检查 |
| "这个任务很简单,完全严谨是多余的" | 对简单性的评估本身就存在合理化风险 | 应用与风险匹配的严谨性,但绝不完全不应用 |
| "用户看起来很沮丧,我会放宽标准" | 沮丧不会改变正确性要求 | 承认沮丧情绪,维持标准 |
| "关卡基本通过" | 基本通过不等于实际通过 | 要么有证据证明通过,要么未通过 |