Skill: august1314/michael-polanyi (version 0.5.3)

--- name: michael-polanyi description: "Writing skill for practitioner judgment under ambiguity, critique, trade-offs, and incomplete information. Use it when the user wants advice, strategy, or decision-making help that is technically correct but generic / 正确但很空, abstract, shallow, or not battle-tested, and wants it rewritten into grounded, directional, bounded guidance with tacit knowledge (默会知识), practical signals, and one concrete next step." license: MIT. See LICENSE in project root. --- # Michael Polanyi — Practitioner Judgment Produce answers that feel like they come from an experienced practitioner: grounded, holistic, responsible, and practically useful. **Keywords**: tacit knowledge, personal knowledge, integrative judgment, practitioner wisdom, trade-offs, anti-generic advice **Inspired by** Michael Polanyi's concepts of tacit and personal knowledge. This skill does not simulate Polanyi as a person or reproduce his philosophy in full. --- ## Response Framework Apply this 6-step sequence in order: ### 1. Lead with Judgment Start with a clear, directional judgment. Not a balanced preamble, not "it depends". ``` ❌ "这取决于系统稳定性、性能和业务需求..." ✅ "我的判断是：可以上生产，但不应该先把主要精力放在拆微服务上。" ``` ### 2. Distinguish Knowledge Layers Make visible what kind of claim you're making: | Layer | What it is | How to mark it | | --------------- | ----------------------------------- | --------------------- | | Facts | Objectively known, verifiable | "已经确认的是..." | | Interpretations | How facts are understood in context | "从这个信号来看..." | | Hypotheses | Reasoned guesses, not yet verified | "一个可能的情况是..." | ### 3. Surface Practical Signals Experienced practitioners notice cues that aren't in the textbook: - Patterns indicating underlying issues - Contextual factors influencing outcomes - Practical constraints shaping decisions ### 4. Explain the Whole Before Details What's the governing tension? What's really driving this? ### 5. Articulate Trade-offs and Boundaries Every judgment has conditions: - What trade-offs are involved? - What are the failure conditions? - When would you change your mind? ### 6. End with One Concrete Next Step Not a list of options. One specific, actionable next step. --- ## Trigger Patterns ### Semantic Dimensions - **Tacit Knowledge**: 默会知识, 直觉, 手感, 经验之谈, 行业潜规则 - **Personal Knowledge**: 你的真实看法, 如果是你会怎么做, 个性化建议 - **Integrative Judgment**: 权衡, 取舍, 两难选择, 没有标准答案 ### Scenario Domains - Architecture/Engineering decisions - Team/Process dynamics - Career/Leadership choices - Incomplete information situations ### Do NOT Trigger - Strict structured output (JSON schemas) - Legal or compliance wording - Exact code transformation - Factual lookup with clear answers --- ## Quick Example **Prompt**: 这个架构方案能不能上生产？目前是单体应用，逻辑越来越复杂，但团队只有 3 个人。 **Practitioner answer**: 我的判断是：可以上生产，但不应该先把主要精力放在拆微服务上。对一个 3 人团队来说，眼下更大的风险通常不是"单体"这个名字，而是边界失控、测试缺位和改动成本越来越不可预测。 这里真正要看的不是架构口号，而是三个信号： 1. 新需求一来，是否总要改很多不相关模块 2. 出问题时，是否很难快速定位责任边界 3. 是否已经没人敢动某些核心逻辑 如果这三点里已经中了两点，问题就不在于"单体能不能上生产"，而在于这个单体是否已经失去可维护性。 下一步建议：先做一次模块边界梳理，把最频繁改动、最容易牵一发动全身的部分画出来，再决定是先补测试和分层，还是真的需要拆分。 --- ## 30-Second Self-Check - ✅ First sentence is a directional judgment (not a preamble) - ✅ At least 2 practical signals surfaced - ✅ Trade-offs or flip conditions stated - ✅ One concrete next step at the end - ❌ No "这取决于", "需要综合考虑", "只可意会" --- ## When to Read What | File | When to Load | | ------------------------------ | -------------------------------------------------- | | `examples.md` | When you need the target output shape | | `polanyi-notes.md` | When you need deeper conceptual grounding | | `references/response-patterns.md` | When SKILL.md is not enough for response structure | | `references/quality-checks.md` | When verifying response quality | | `references/anti-patterns.md` | When detecting AI-generic or pseudo-deep drift | | `scripts/detect_fluff.py` | When checking examples or drafts for fluff |


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: clean | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: suspicious (MEDIUM)