solution-space

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

/solution-space

Explore candidate solutions before committing to implementation. The trap is defending the first workable idea.

Solution Space sits between Problem Statement and Implementation. You have the problem framed; now map the approaches before picking one.

在投入实现前探索候选解决方案。需要警惕的陷阱是执着于第一个可行的想法。

解决方案空间（Solution Space）介于问题描述与实现之间。当你已明确问题框架后，先梳理所有可行方案，再做选择。

When to Use

适用场景

Invoke

/solution-space

when:

Problem is understood - You have a clear problem statement
Multiple approaches seem viable - Not obvious which path is best
You're about to start coding - Pause and explore before committing
Patches keep accumulating - Third config flag for the same bug
You feel attached to your first idea - That's the warning sign

Do not use when: You're still clarifying the problem. Use

/problem-statement

first. Solution Space assumes the problem is framed.

在以下场景调用

/solution-space

：

已明确问题 - 你拥有清晰的问题描述
多种方案看似可行 - 无法明确哪种路径最优
即将开始编码 - 在投入前先暂停并探索方案
补丁不断累积 - 为同一个bug添加第三个配置项
执着于第一个想法 - 这是危险信号

请勿在以下场景使用：你仍在梳理问题。请先使用

/problem-statement

。解决方案空间的前提是问题已被明确界定。

The Local Maximum Trap

局部最优陷阱

"The hardest part of design has never been coming up with ideas. It is letting go of the first workable idea to look for better ones."

Exploration is cheap. The failure mode is defending the first solution that works.

Signs you're stuck on a local maximum:

First solution considered is the only solution considered
You're explaining why alternatives won't work before trying them
You're acting as a crafter (defending) rather than an editor (filtering)
Implementation details discussed before approaches compared

"设计最困难的部分从来不是想出点子，而是放下第一个可行的想法去寻找更好的方案。"

探索的成本很低。失败的模式就是执着于第一个有效的解决方案。

陷入局部最优的信号：

只考虑第一个想到的解决方案
在尝试替代方案前就解释为什么它们不可行
你在扮演捍卫者（执着于现有想法）而非筛选者（评估方案）
在对比不同方案前就讨论实现细节

The Escalation Ladder

方案升级阶梯

Not all problems need redesigns. The ladder helps you find the right altitude.

并非所有问题都需要重新设计。这个阶梯能帮你找到合适的处理层级。

Level 1: Band-Aid Fix

层级1：临时修复（Band-Aid Fix）

Don't default to this. Patch the symptom.

Fine under deadline pressure
Toxic as habit
Signal: "This will break again"

Example: Add a null check. Catch the exception. Hardcode the edge case.

不要默认选择此方案。仅修复表面症状。

在截止日期压力下可以接受
但长期使用会产生危害
信号：“这个问题还会再次出现”

示例：添加空值检查。捕获异常。硬编码处理边缘情况。

Level 2: Local Optimum

层级2：局部优化（Local Optimum）

Better, but limited. Optimize within current assumptions.

Classic refactor trap
Improves what exists without questioning it
Signal: "This is cleaner but the same shape"

Example: Extract a method. Add a parameter. Refactor for readability.

比临时修复好，但有局限性。在现有假设范围内进行优化。

典型的重构陷阱
在不质疑现有架构的前提下改进
信号：“代码更简洁了，但整体架构没变”

示例：提取方法。添加参数。为提升可读性重构代码。

Level 3: Reframe

层级3：重构问题定义（Reframe）

Now you're thinking. Question the problem statement.

Different framing yields different solutions
Often reveals the actual constraint
Signal: "What if the problem is actually..."

Example: "We need faster cache invalidation" becomes "Why do we cache this at all?"

这才是正确的思考方向。质疑原有的问题描述。

不同的问题框架会带来不同的解决方案
通常能揭示真正的约束条件
信号：“如果问题本质是……会怎样？”

示例：“我们需要更快的缓存失效机制”转变为“我们到底为什么要缓存这个内容？”

Level 4: Redesign

层级4：重新设计（Redesign）

This is the goal. Change the system so the problem doesn't exist.

The higher peak, the terraform
Problems dissolve rather than get solved
Signal: "With this change, we wouldn't need to..."

Example: Instead of fixing sync conflicts, make the data flow unidirectional.

这是最终目标。改变系统架构，从根源上消除问题。

如同登上更高的山峰，彻底改造系统
问题被彻底解决而非暂时缓解
信号：“通过这个改动，我们就不需要再……”

示例：不再修复同步冲突，而是让数据流变为单向模式。

The Process

实施流程

Step 1: State the Problem (Confirm)

步骤1：确认问题描述

Before exploring solutions, confirm the problem statement:

"The problem we're solving is: [statement]. The key constraint is: [constraint]. Success looks like: [outcome]."

If you can't state this clearly, go back to

/problem-statement

在探索方案前，先确认问题描述：

"我们要解决的问题是：[描述]。核心约束是：[约束条件]。成功的标准是：[预期结果]。"

如果你无法清晰表述以上内容，请回到

/problem-statement

。

Step 2: Generate Candidates (Breadth)

步骤2：生成候选方案（广度探索）

List at least 3-4 candidate approaches before evaluating any:

markdown

undefined

在评估前，至少列出3-4个候选方案：

markdown

undefined

Candidate Solutions

候选解决方案

Option A: [Name]

方案A：[名称]

Approach: [Brief description]
Level: [Band-Aid / Local Optimum / Reframe / Redesign]
Trade-off: [Main cost]

思路：[简要描述]
层级：[临时修复/局部优化/重构问题定义/重新设计]
权衡：[主要成本]

Option B: [Name]

方案B：[名称]

...


**Rules for this step:**
- No evaluation yet - just generation
- Include at least one approach from a higher level than your instinct
- Include the "obvious" solution even if you don't like it

...


**此步骤规则**：
- 先不做评估，只生成方案
- 至少包含一个比你直觉选择层级更高的方案
- 即使你不喜欢，也要列出“显而易见”的方案

Step 3: Evaluate Trade-offs (Depth)

步骤3：评估权衡（深度分析）

For each candidate, assess:

Does it solve the stated problem? (Not a related problem)
What's the implementation cost? (Time, complexity, risk)
What's the maintenance cost? (Ongoing burden)
Does it create new problems? (Second-order effects)
Does it enable future options? (Optionality)

针对每个候选方案，评估以下维度：

是否解决了明确的问题？（而非相关问题）
实现成本是多少？（时间、复杂度、风险）
维护成本是多少？（长期负担）
是否会产生新问题？（次生影响）
是否为未来预留了扩展空间？（可扩展性）

Step 4: Recommend with Reasoning

步骤4：给出带理由的推荐

Make a recommendation and state why:

markdown

undefined

明确推荐方案并说明原因：

markdown

undefined

Recommendation

Output Format

输出格式

markdown

undefined

markdown

undefined

Solution Space Analysis

解决方案空间分析

Problem: [One sentence] Key Constraint: [The binding constraint]

问题： [一句话描述] 核心约束： [关键约束条件]

Candidates Considered

候选方案

Option	Level	Approach	Trade-off
A	[Level]	[Brief]	[Cost]
B	[Level]	[Brief]	[Cost]
C	[Level]	[Brief]	[Cost]

选项	层级	思路	权衡
A	[层级]	[简要描述]	[成本]
B	[层级]	[简要描述]	[成本]
C	[层级]	[简要描述]	[成本]

Evaluation

评估结果

Option A: [Name]

Solves stated problem: [Yes/Partially/No]
Implementation cost: [Low/Medium/High]
Maintenance burden: [Low/Medium/High]
Second-order effects: [Description]

[Repeat for each option]

方案A：[名称]

是否解决问题：[是/部分解决/否]
实现成本：[低/中/高]
维护负担：[低/中/高]
次生影响：[描述]

[对每个选项重复以上评估]

Recommendation

Implementation Notes

实施注意事项

[Any specific considerations for the selected approach]

undefined

[针对选中方案的具体考虑]

undefined

Examples

示例

Example 1: Performance Problem

示例1：性能问题

/solution-space

Users report the dashboard is slow. Loading takes 8 seconds.

Output:

markdown

undefined

/solution-space

用户反馈仪表盘加载缓慢，耗时8秒。

输出：

markdown

undefined

Solution Space Analysis

解决方案空间分析

Problem: Dashboard loads in 8 seconds; users expect <2 seconds Key Constraint: Can't rewrite the entire frontend this quarter

问题： 仪表盘加载耗时8秒，用户期望加载时间<2秒 核心约束： 本季度无法重写整个前端

Candidates Considered

候选方案

Option	Level	Approach	Trade-off
A	Band-Aid	Add loading spinner	Doesn't fix slowness
B	Local Optimum	Add caching layer	Cache invalidation complexity
C	Reframe	Lazy-load dashboard sections	Changes UX slightly
D	Redesign	Stream data, render incrementally	Larger change

选项	层级	思路	权衡
A	临时修复	添加加载动画	无法真正解决缓慢问题
B	局部优化	添加缓存层	缓存失效逻辑复杂
C	重构问题定义	懒加载仪表盘模块	轻微改变用户体验
D	重新设计	流式传输数据，增量渲染	改动范围较大

Evaluation

评估结果

Option A: Loading Spinner

Solves stated problem: No (perception only)
Implementation cost: Low
Second-order: Users still wait 8 seconds

Option B: Caching Layer

Solves stated problem: Partially (helps repeat visits)
Implementation cost: Medium
Second-order: Stale data risk, invalidation complexity

Option C: Lazy Loading

Solves stated problem: Yes (perceived speed)
Implementation cost: Medium
Second-order: Slight UX change, content shifts

Option D: Streaming Render

Solves stated problem: Yes (actual + perceived)
Implementation cost: High
Second-order: Enables future improvements, larger change

方案A：加载动画

是否解决问题：否（仅改变感知）
实现成本：低
次生影响：用户仍需等待8秒

方案B：缓存层

是否解决问题：部分解决（对重复访问有效）
实现成本：中
次生影响：存在数据过期风险，失效逻辑复杂

方案C：懒加载

是否解决问题：是（提升感知速度）
实现成本：中
次生影响：轻微改变用户体验，内容会出现位移

方案D：流式渲染

是否解决问题：是（同时提升实际和感知速度）
实现成本：高
次生影响：为未来优化预留空间，但改动范围大

Recommendation

Example 2: The Third Config Flag

示例2：第三个配置项

/solution-space

We have a bug where notifications fire twice. This is the third
config flag we're adding to work around notification timing issues.

Output:

markdown

undefined

/solution-space

我们遇到了通知重复触发的bug，这是我们为解决通知时序问题准备添加的第三个配置项。

输出：

markdown

undefined

Solution Space Analysis

解决方案空间分析

Problem: Notifications fire twice; third config flag proposed Key Constraint: Pattern of band-aids suggests systemic issue

问题： 通知重复触发，计划添加第三个配置项 核心约束： 不断添加临时补丁表明存在系统性问题

Candidates Considered

候选方案

Option	Level	Approach	Trade-off
A	Band-Aid	Add debounce flag	4th flag incoming
B	Local Optimum	Consolidate notification logic	Still reactive model
C	Reframe	Why do we notify on this event?	May simplify
D	Redesign	Event sourcing for notifications	Larger change

选项	层级	思路	权衡
A	临时修复	添加防抖配置项	很快会需要第四个配置项
B	局部优化	整合通知逻辑	仍为被动式修复
C	重构问题定义	为什么要在这个事件触发通知？	可能简化逻辑
D	重新设计	事件溯源实现通知	重构范围大

Evaluation

评估结果

Option A: Debounce Flag

Solves stated problem: Temporarily
Second-order: Maintenance nightmare, flags interact

Option B: Consolidate Logic

Solves stated problem: Probably
Second-order: Still treating symptoms

Option C: Question the Trigger

Solves stated problem: Possibly dissolves it
Second-order: May reveal unnecessary complexity

Option D: Event Sourcing

Solves stated problem: Yes, prevents duplicates by design
Second-order: Significant refactor

方案A：防抖配置项

是否解决问题：暂时解决
次生影响：维护成本激增，配置项之间会产生冲突

方案B：整合逻辑

是否解决问题：可能
次生影响：仍在处理表面症状

方案C：质疑触发逻辑

是否解决问题：可能从根源消除
次生影响：可能发现不必要的复杂度

方案D：事件溯源

是否解决问题：是，从设计上避免重复
次生影响：重构范围大

Recommendation

Session Persistence

会话持久化

This skill can persist context to

.oh/<session>.md

for use by subsequent skills.

If session name provided (

/solution-space auth-refactor

Reads/writes
```
.oh/auth-refactor.md
```
directly

If no session name provided (

/solution-space

After producing the solution space analysis, offer to save it:

"Save to session? [suggested-name] [custom] [skip]"
Suggest a name based on git branch or the problem being solved

Reading: Check for existing session file. Read prior skill outputs—Aim, Problem Statement, Problem Space—to understand what we're solving and the constraints.

Writing: After producing output, write the solution space analysis to the session file:

markdown

undefined

此技能可将上下文保存到

.oh/<session>.md

，供后续技能使用。

如果提供了会话名称（如

/solution-space auth-refactor

）：

直接读写
```
.oh/auth-refactor.md
```

如果未提供会话名称（如

/solution-space

）：

生成解决方案空间分析后，会询问是否保存：

"保存到会话？[建议名称] [自定义] [跳过]"
会根据Git分支或当前问题生成建议名称

读取： 检查是否存在会话文件。读取之前的技能输出——Aim、Problem Statement、Problem Space——以理解问题背景和约束条件。

写入： 生成输出后，将解决方案空间分析写入会话文件：

markdown

undefined

Solution Space

解决方案空间

Updated: <timestamp>

[solution space analysis and recommendation]

undefined

更新时间： <时间戳>

[解决方案空间分析和推荐内容]

undefined

Adaptive Enhancement

自适应增强

Base Skill (prompt only)

基础技能（仅提示）

Works anywhere. Produces solution space analysis for discussion. No persistence.

可在任意环境使用。生成解决方案空间分析用于讨论。无持久化功能。

With .oh/ session file

配合.oh/会话文件

Reads
```
.oh/<session>.md
```
for prior context (aim, problem statement, constraints)
Writes solution analysis and recommendation to the session file
```
/execute
```
can read the selected approach

读取
```
.oh/<session>.md
```
获取历史上下文（目标、问题描述、约束条件）
将解决方案分析和推荐内容写入会话文件
```
/execute
```
可读取选中的方案

With Open Horizons MCP

配合Open Horizons MCP

Queries related past solution decisions
Finds similar problems across endeavors
Logs the solution space exploration and decision
Session file serves as local cache

查询相关的历史解决方案决策
跨项目查找类似问题
记录解决方案空间探索和决策过程
会话文件作为本地缓存

Position in Framework

在框架中的位置

Comes after:

/problem-statement

(you need a framed problem to evaluate solutions against). Leads to:

/execute

to implement, or

/dissent

to challenge the recommendation. Can loop back to:

/problem-statement

(if exploration reveals the problem is mis-framed).

之前的步骤：

/problem-statement

（你需要明确的问题框架，才能评估解决方案）。 之后的步骤：

/execute

（实现选中的方案），或

/dissent

（挑战推荐方案）。 可回到的步骤：

/problem-statement

（如果探索发现问题框架有误）。

Leads To

后续流程

After solution-space, typically:

```
/execute
```
- Implement the selected approach
```
/dissent
```
- If the recommendation feels too easy
```
/problem-statement
```
- If exploration revealed the problem is mis-framed

Remember: The goal isn't to always pick Redesign. It's to know you explored before committing. A deliberate Band-Aid beats an accidental one.

完成解决方案空间分析后，通常会进入以下流程：

```
/execute
```
- 实现选中的方案
```
/dissent
```
- 如果觉得推荐方案过于草率
```
/problem-statement
```
- 如果探索发现问题框架有误

记住： 目标不是每次都选择重新设计，而是确保在投入前进行了充分探索。刻意选择的临时修复，好过无意识的被动补丁。

solution-space

Original

Translation

/solution-space

/solution-space

When to Use

适用场景

The Local Maximum Trap

局部最优陷阱

The Escalation Ladder

方案升级阶梯

Level 1: Band-Aid Fix

层级1：临时修复（Band-Aid Fix）

Level 2: Local Optimum

层级2：局部优化（Local Optimum）

Level 3: Reframe

层级3：重构问题定义（Reframe）

Level 4: Redesign

层级4：重新设计（Redesign）

The Process

实施流程

Step 1: State the Problem (Confirm)

步骤1：确认问题描述

Step 2: Generate Candidates (Breadth)

步骤2：生成候选方案（广度探索）

Candidate Solutions

候选解决方案

Option A: [Name]

方案A：[名称]

Option B: [Name]

方案B：[名称]

Step 3: Evaluate Trade-offs (Depth)

步骤3：评估权衡（深度分析）

Step 4: Recommend with Reasoning

步骤4：给出带理由的推荐

Recommendation

推荐方案

Step 5: Check for Local Maximum

步骤5：检查是否陷入局部最优

Output Format

输出格式

Solution Space Analysis

解决方案空间分析

Candidates Considered

候选方案

Evaluation

评估结果

Recommendation

推荐方案

Implementation Notes

实施注意事项

Examples

示例

Example 1: Performance Problem

示例1：性能问题

Solution Space Analysis

解决方案空间分析

Candidates Considered

候选方案

Evaluation

评估结果

Recommendation

推荐方案

Example 2: The Third Config Flag

示例2：第三个配置项

Solution Space Analysis

解决方案空间分析

Candidates Considered

候选方案

Evaluation

评估结果

Recommendation

推荐方案

Session Persistence

会话持久化

Solution Space

解决方案空间

Adaptive Enhancement

自适应增强

Base Skill (prompt only)