skill-evolver · diff
git:20261011.b7cf350 to git:20261011.293c4ad
66 added, 51 removed. Audit A to A.
---
name: skill-evolver
description: >-
Researches and improves a specified existing Skill using successful/failed work and competitor
evidence. Use for 优化这个Skill, 从成功和失败经验改进Skill, or 研究竞品后优化指定技能.
Routine creation and editing use skill-creator.
argument-hint: "<target Skill> [desired result or evidence]"
---
# Daymade Skill Evolver
- Run a research-driven improvement round for a named existing Skill: identify what
- would improve its actual task results, evaluate relevant mechanisms, implement
- within authorization, and verify the resulting consumer behavior. An unchanged
- Skill is a valid outcome when the evidence supports keeping it.
+ Orchestrate a research-driven improvement round for a named existing Skill through
+ the current specialist Skills. Keep the original result, stage inputs, dependencies
+ and returned evidence bound together. An unchanged Skill is a valid outcome when
+ the evidence supports keeping it.
- Keep optimization decisions here. Use Skill Creator for making and validating
- selected changes; it does not choose this round's business goal or research plan.
+ Keep orchestration here; execute specialist work through its current owner. Skill
+ Creator makes and validates selected changes; it does not choose this round's
+ business goal or research plan.
When the request is diagnosis-only, remain read-only.
## Resolve the target and result
Resolve the named Skill to its authoritative repository or project source, current
release identity, and actual loaded entry when relevant. Read its entry and the
resources used by the affected jobs. Distinguish source, installed copies and host
consumption; do not edit a cache as if it were the owner.
State the user-visible result, the observation that could disprove it, supported
jobs to preserve, authorized deliverables, and stopping condition before selecting
improvements. Include the original reported failure. Do not replace it with a
research report, a shorter prompt, a score, or green checks. Ask only for missing
information or a user-owned choice that changes the work; reuse existing answers
and authorization.
Keep the outcome criterion stable while comparing candidates. Correct a proxy
against the original requirement before accepting an improvement; do not move the
goal to whichever output the candidate already produces.
## Gather evidence that can change a decision
Start with current implementation, project decisions, existing tools/Skills,
provided examples, and previously verified work. Reuse evidence whose source and
- conditions still apply. Load [evidence to change](references/evidence-to-change.md)
- before interpreting historical cases or positive opportunities.
+ conditions still apply under the current owner's contract. Before executing a
+ selected stage, load [stage handoffs](references/evidence-to-change.md) and follow
+ its applicable owner route; this reference specifies inputs and returned results,
+ not a second specialist procedure.
- For authorized history, use the owning index and exact reader. Bound the sessions,
- time window or candidate set before reading content. Distinguish user instructions,
- observed outputs and an author's later report. Omit hidden reasoning and prepare
- redacted, source-anchored inputs before delegation. Missing index coverage is a
- specific evidence gap; do not replace it with an unbounded raw-history scan.
+ Select stages from the user's explicit request, accepted route and unresolved
+ questions. A narrow repair with decisive existing evidence need not run unrelated
+ research, but its simplicity does not waive a requested history, favorites,
+ competitor or Deep Research lane. Mark reused, executed, unnecessary and blocked
+ work accurately; do not describe skipped research as completed.
- Include successful work and user corrections as well as errors. A positive
- opportunity does not require an earlier failure in our Skill. Use the reference's
- matched-case route for a diagnosed deviation and its opportunity route for a
- successful or external mechanism.
+ For each selected stage, resolve and load the current owning Skill and its relevant
+ branch before doing the work. Pass the original user goal, target source/ref, old
+ successful jobs, authorization, prepared evidence and question to resolve. Execute
+ that workflow and inspect its actual evidence or result before continuing; an owner
+ list or a load receipt alone is not a completed stage. Keep gaps attached to the
+ dependent decision rather than rebuilding an evidence list from the recommendation.
- ## Research the target's task capabilities
+ Use the history-reader and Skill Creator handoffs for authorized history and
+ prepared cases, including successes, failures and user corrections. A positive
+ opportunity does not require an earlier failure in our Skill. A request to audit a
+ whole session and route its lessons uses the optional session-retrospective handoff;
+ ordinary target improvement does not require a separate retrospective receipt.
- Choose sources by the business result and the target's actual task surface,
- including important input, error, recovery and downstream-consumer paths. Search
- existing assets and supplied/configured favorites before external tool or method
- selection. Discover relevant competitors by capability, not only by the current
- Skill name. Include a candidate that could disprove the preferred approach.
+ ## Research the target's task capabilities
- Bind repository-backed comparisons to an immutable source ref and the relevant
- edition or shipped artifact. Trace the real execution entry through normal,
- failure, recovery and consumer paths before borrowing a mechanism. Cite the
- source location and distinguish source-contract facts from exercised behavior
- and unmeasured business benefits. Use current first-party material for external
- contracts. Use Deep Research when unresolved breadth or synthesis needs it; do
- not force a provider, paid mode or report length.
+ Bind research questions to the business result and target's input, error, recovery
+ and downstream-consumer paths. Execute the favorites-search handoff before external
+ tool or method selection, then the competitors-analysis source and synthesis routes
+ for relevant capabilities. Return their source-bound mechanisms and counterevidence
+ to this round; do not substitute a feature list for the owner's decision chain.
- Keep the research questions and discovered mechanisms before constructing the
- final comparison. Stop retrieval when remaining answers cannot change selection
- or required acceptance. A narrow repair decided by an existing contract and
- reproducible probe does not need unrelated research lanes.
+ Execute deep-research for requested research lanes or unresolved breadth/synthesis,
+ using its current asset, mode and source contracts. Reuse accepted routes and
+ existing original exports; do not force a provider, paid mode or report length.
+ Stop retrieval when remaining answers cannot change selection or required
+ acceptance. Keep source-contract facts, exercised behavior and unmeasured business
+ benefits separate when joining the returned evidence.
## Decide every important mechanism
- Give each important discovered mechanism an explicit disposition: adopt, do not
- adopt, or needs verification. Attach its evidence, fit conditions, expected
- increment over the current owner, cost, falsifier and reopening condition. Read
- counterevidence before treating repeated endorsements as causal proof. Preserve
- useful existing mechanisms; do not manufacture changes to fill a comparison.
+ Use Skill Creator's applicable ordinary-update or cross-task-improvement handoff
+ to classify evidence-backed findings and identify the smallest maintenance point.
+ Use competitors-analysis's
+ Landscape handoff to account for every important discovered mechanism as adopt,
+ do not adopt or needs verification under its existing disposition contract. Check
+ the returned coverage against the original questions and sources, including
+ positive opportunities and existing equivalents; do not manufacture changes.
- Use the reference to distinguish a missing mechanism, a correct mechanism not
- loaded or bypassed, a wrong acceptance criterion, an implementation defect, and
- a stale constraint. Fix the smallest maintenance point that changes the next
- execution. If an existing owner already covers the need, repair its loading or
- invocation instead of duplicating it. Combine compatible improvements; leave
+ When a technical alternative must be chosen, execute tech-selection's applicable
+ full or lightweight route with the joined evidence and current authorization.
+ Carry its actual choice or unresolved user-owned decision into implementation.
+ If an existing owner already covers the need, repair its loading or invocation
+ instead of duplicating it. Combine compatible improvements; leave
major direction, new product scope, real preferences and irreversible/external
choices at their existing authorization boundary. Choose and execute necessary
local reversible implementation details within the authorized target work.
## Implement and verify the selected changes
Freeze the complete target bundle from an immutable source before editing.
Preserve its triggers, supported jobs, interfaces, confirmation points, recovery
paths and user-owned data. Work in an isolated source checkout when the shared
checkout carries other work. Keep the target's source and directly affected
instructions, examples, help and caller routes aligned.
Inventory affected runtime defaults and side effects before replacing a mechanism,
including read/write behavior, access permissions and generated-output locations.
Preserve them unless the authorized improvement explicitly changes them and its
acceptance checks cover that change. Do not infer a new requirement from a
general security preference.
- Use the repository's normal change workflow and the available Skill Creator
- making/verification tools. Classify changes by their actual failure surface;
+ Execute the Skill Creator making, migration and verification handoff for the
+ selected change under the repository's normal workflow. Pass the frozen business
+ criterion, old jobs and defaults/side effects as preservation requirements. Use
+ the target's execution owner for its actual consumer and recovery check; do not
+ delegate away responsibility for whether the joined result meets the request.
+ Classify changes by their actual failure surface;
new capability or methodology does not automatically authorize paired evaluation,
benchmarking, repeated trials, a viewer, or extra agents.
Verify the original result through its real consumer, including the affected
failure and recovery path. Check important old jobs against the frozen bundle.
Separate static preservation from task-result evidence. Calibrate acceptance with
known healthy and failing cases; missing inputs and empty values are distinct
when the rule examines them. Source reading, a subprocess exit, tests or CI may
support a claim but cannot substitute for the result being requested.
Complete authorized delivery through the target repository's release and local
availability procedures. Read back the exact published or consumed object when
that is part of the requested result. Keep human acceptance unconfirmed when it
has not been observed; still finish the authorized implementation and checks.
## Use available executors without losing the result
- Discover installed specialist Skills by capability when useful: history readers,
- favorites-search, competitors-analysis, deep-research, tech-selection and
- skill-creator. Resolve their installed identity and load their current contract;
- do not copy their engines or assume a sibling file ships in this standalone
- plugin. Delegate only under current authorization and host capabilities.
+ Resolve selected owners by capability through skills-search and current configured
+ source/installed entries. Do not assume every owner ships in this standalone plugin
+ or guess a public path for a team/private Skill. The same agent may load and execute
+ Skills sequentially. Before authorized delegation or parallel independent lanes,
+ load daymade-agent-discipline; dependent stages wait for the evidence they need.
+ Do not assign one agent per Skill by default or copy an owner's engine here.
+
+ An absent invocation tool does not make a resolved Skill absent: read its current
+ entry and execute the applicable workflow with available tools.
If a specialist is absent, use available tools for the same substantive work:
read bounded supplied records, inspect fixed source objects, run the needed
probe, compare trade-offs, or edit and validate the canonical source. Do not
invent a specialist invocation or claim its gate passed. If a required source,
permission, runtime or consumer is unavailable, pause only that dependent item,
name the missing observation and resume condition, and continue independent
authorized work. Missing optional tooling does not waive a required outcome.
## Stop and leave an incremental continuation
Report the actual improvement or evidence-backed no-change decision, the exact
source/diff and result evidence, and the remaining unmet criteria. Keep source,
publication, installation, prepared-task runs and live business results distinct.
Update only changed decisions and source anchors in the target project's existing
canonical document when one exists. Keep reusable corrections in their owning
Skill; preserve raw historical records as history. Leave the next unmet action
and its reopening condition in the existing task context rather than creating
memory or a second state ledger. Resume from that action instead of repeating
settled research. Stop when required results and delivery are verified, or when
only explicitly blocked items remain; do not start an automatic improvement loop.