Rite压力测试
ViktorsBaikers2026-10-27查看 1820复制 110
对粗略/模糊的想法进行压力测试:构思、探索 3-5 种方法、完全不同的形状、在规范之前发散然后在方向上收敛。不是为了编写规范。
📘如何使用这个技能
- 1复制技能内容·点击上方「Copy SKILL.md」复制全部内容,或 Download 下载到本地
- 2打开你的 AI 客户端·支持 Claude Code、Trae、Cursor、ChatGPT、DeepSeek、Kimi 等任意 AI 助手
- 3粘贴为系统提示/知识文件·Claude Code:放入 .claude/skills/ 目录;普通对话:作为首条消息发送并说「请严格按这份技能文档执行」
- 4直接提出你的需求·AI 会按技能定义的工作流、格式和约束来处理,无需再解释背景
💡 提示:技能生效后,每次对话只需一句需求,AI 会按 SKILL.md 的流程执行。
SKILL.md4722 chars
---
name: rite-pressure-test
description: "Pressure-test a rough/vague idea: ideate, explore 3-5 approaches, radically different shapes, diverge then converge on direction before spec. Not for writing spec."
argument-hint: "[rough idea or plan to stress-test]"
user-invocable: true
---
<!-- loads: {"always":["devrites-lib/reference/standards/core.md","devrites-lib/reference/intent-map.md"],"workspace":["decisions.md","questions.md"]} -->
> Read-set manifest: `devrites-engine context --skills-root .omp/skills <slug> --skill rite-pressure-test` (no workspace: `--out <path>`) bundles every file named below into one deduplicated read.
# /rite-pressure-test: diverge then converge
Use when the idea—not only requirements—is rough. Compare directions before
`/rite-spec`; never implement. Read [`core.md`](skill://devrites-lib/reference/standards/core.md)
first and write only workspace/ticket artifacts.
## Diverge (widen)
- Search `decisions.md`, accepted ADRs, and relevant archives for rejected directions;
revive one only with evidence that answers its recorded reason, citing both.
- Generate 3-5 different shapes, including obvious, smaller, and different-boundary/data/
flow options, plus a **do-nothing baseline** (cost of not building) that every option
must beat. Use named lenses— inversion, constraint removal, audience shift, 10×, or
expert practice—without padding. Borrow analogous mechanisms, not branding.
- For each, name concrete entities/flows/surfaces, optimization, rough cost, and main risk.
## Converge (commit)
- Weigh options against the goal, constraints, and existing codebase conventions.
- Prefer felt pain over nice-to-have. Rank differentiation: new capability > 10× gain >
new audience > new context > better UX > cheaper; do not dress a vitamin as a painkiller.
- Recommend one, with the reason and the key trade-off accepted. When no option beats
the do-nothing baseline, recommend **Kill**: record the reason in `decisions.md` and
do not route to `/rite-spec`.
- Note what would change the recommendation (the decision's hinge).
## Premise evidence floor
If the hinge is an uncertain material fact, freeze at most three questions for
`devrites-evidence-scout`. Validate every citation; missing/malformed/unverifiable output is
`unavailable`, never support. Record claim, support, strongest contrary evidence, and
`supported | assumption | refuted`. Refutation changes the recommendation; an assumption
advances only when non-decisive with bounded downside. Weak/conflicting decisive evidence
returns **Hold** with the resolving evidence, never `/rite-spec`. Persist a Hold before
stopping; a reply-only Hold is lost. In an active workspace (has `state.md`), append an open
`questions.md` entry (`gate: blocking`, the premise and resolving evidence). Otherwise add a
`Hold:` line (premise + resolving evidence) under `Not yet specified` in the provisional
slug's `investigation-map.md`; `/rite-spec` carries it into `questions.md` on adoption. Tie-breaker:
see [`intent-map.md`](skill://devrites-lib/reference/intent-map.md) (`rite-pressure-test`
vs `rite-spec`). Do not research preferences
or reversible implementation choices.
## Boundaries
- This is exploration, not specification. Output a **direction**, not a finished spec:
`/rite-spec` writes the spec.
- Don't over-explore: 3-5 options, one pass of convergence. If the user already knows
the direction, skip this and go straight to `/rite-spec`. If the effort is too foggy for
one pass, start an investigation map at `.devrites/work/<slug>/investigation-map.md`
(create the directory; pick a provisional slug `/rite-spec` can adopt)
with `Destination`, `Decisions so far`, `Not yet specified`, `Out of scope`, plus one
frontier question per session.
- Ask the user to pick when two options are close and the choice changes the product.
- Name a **"Not doing" list**: the good options you deliberately cut. It's the highest-value
output of convergence: it hands `/rite-spec` its scope boundary. When a cut is
durable, offer to record the reason in the active feature's `decisions.md` or
a durable ADR rather than a parallel rejection index.
```
Done: pressure test complete for <goal>.
Changed: workspace only
Evidence: options compared <n>; recommendation <option>; hinge <condition>; premises <supported/assumption/refuted + sources>
Open: <none | unresolved premise and resolving evidence>
Next: <when supported: /rite-spec <feature>; when Hold: none — requires <resolving evidence>; when Kill: none — not building: <reason>>
Record: <investigation-map.md path (incl. provisional Hold) | questions.md id (Hold) | not applicable>
↻ Hygiene: /clear before starting the lifecycle
```