adhd
Parallel divergent ideation for coding agents. Spawns N isolated branches under different cognitive frames (regulator, biology, speedrunner, 10-year-old, $0 budget), scores, clusters, prunes traps, and deepens top survivors. Use on /adhd, "ADHD mode", brainstorm/ideate intents, or open-ended design, architecture, naming, API/SDK surface, and fuzzy-debugging decisions. Skip for syntax, lookups, bugs with known root cause, or closed phrasing ("quick", "standard", "canonical", "textbook"). Full pre
Оригинален текст · няма потвърден превод на българскиПърво прочетете инструкцията.
Файлът се зарежда от посочения източник само по ваше действие. Можете да го прочетете тук, да го копирате или да го запазите като .md.
GitHub хранилище- Звезди на репото
- 4255
- Лиценз
- MIT
- Последна проверка на записа
- 21.09.2026 г.
Добавете в своя инструмент.
Командата отваря избора на skills от репозитория. Прочетете файла и условията на автора преди изпълнение.
npx skills add UditAkhourii/adhdСтраницата копира текст. Не инсталира и не изпълнява нищо на устройството ви.
Откъс от SKILL.md
Началото на файла на автора, без превод.
ADHD
Stop picking the textbook answer. The first three answers the model would give are the answers a senior engineer would give in thirty seconds. Correct. Forgettable. The interesting answers live past number three, in the awkward middle nobody walks into. This skill makes the model walk there.
Pre-flight (run before Phase 1)
This skill is expensive. About 10 Agent calls, 30 to 90 seconds wall clock, 5 to 10x a single answer. Do not pay that cost when a direct answer is better. Run this gate before Phase 1.
Step 1. Explicit invocation check.
If the user typed /adhd or explicitly asked for ADHD mode, "use the
adhd skill", or "run ADHD on this", SKIP the rest of this section and go
straight to Phase 1. The user opted in. Do not second-guess.
Step 2. Self-judge (only if Step 1 did not match).
Ask yourself three questions. If the answer to any is no, ABORT.
- Open-ended? Would a senior engineer give multiple viable answers here, or is there one canonical answer? If canonical, abort.
- High-stakes? Is the cost of the obvious answer being wrong actually high? Architecture decisions, public API surfaces, naming a real product, fuzzy bugs with no known root cause, schema design = yes. Side project at 11pm = no.
- Open phrasing? Did the user avoid words like "quick", "standard", "canonical", "textbook", "just", "one-line"? If they used any of those, they want the direct answer. Abort.
If all three checks pass, proceed to Phase 1.
If any fails, ABORT and answer the question directly. Optionally append
one sentence: "If you want a wider exploration under parallel cognitive
frames with explicit trap detection, run /adhd <your problem>."
The loop
Two strict phases. Mixing them kills idea quality, because the critic strangles the generator.
Phase 1 — Diverge (no critic)
For the problem P:
-
Pick 5 cognitive frames from the table below. Bias toward engineering tags when the problem is code-shaped. Always include at least one wild frame to keep range.
-
Spawn 5 parallel Agent/Task tool calls. One per frame. Each Agent gets only:
- the problem P
- any context the user provided
- the chosen frame's vantage prompt
- a system instruction that forbids evaluation
The exact instruction to give each Agent: