SuperAPI AI Directory
Partner中文AI newsFavorites
Skillsdidyouknow-v2

didyouknow-v2

Office & productivity

View repository

Updated 10-16 03:36

About this skill

Please deep think / ultrathink as this is a complex task.

didyouknow

Universal clarity builder - analyze any context (spec, plan, tasks, subtask, code) and surface critical "Did you know?" insights through natural conversation. Supports two modes: default (risks, gotchas, hidden assumptions) and enhance (scoped improvement ideas).

User input:

$ARGUMENTS

Expected usage patterns:

/didyouknow --spec <path>      # Analyze a feature specification
/didyouknow --plan <path>      # Analyze an implementation plan
/didyouknow --tasks <path>     # Analyze phase tasks
/didyouknow --subtask <path>   # Analyze a subtask
/didyouknow --code <path>      # Analyze code file(s)
/didyouknow                    # Auto-detect most recent context
/didyouknow --enhance          # Enhancement mode (5 ideas, scoped to feature)
/didyouknow --enhance 3        # Enhancement mode with custom count
/didyouknow --enhance --spec <path>  # Enhance mode on a specific spec

Modes

Default Mode (clarity)

Surface risks, gotchas, hidden assumptions, and non-obvious implications in what already exists. Always 5 insights.

Enhance Mode (--enhance [N])

Surface scoped improvement ideas — UX polish, missing quality-of-life features, enhancements to the existing feature. Does NOT suggest tangential or out-of-scope ideas. Defaults to 5 ideas; the user may specify a custom count (e.g. --enhance 3, --enhance 10).

Purpose

Build shared understanding between human and AI. In default mode, surface non-obvious implications, gotchas, and critical insights. In enhance mode, surface improvement ideas scoped to the feature being analyzed. This is a clarity and ideation tool — run it whenever you need to step back and really understand or improve what's being built.

Flow

1) Context Loading

  • Parse flags to determine context type (spec/plan/tasks/subtask/code)
  • Detect mode: if --enhance is present, activate enhance mode. Parse optional count (default 5).
  • If auto-detect mode (no flags): search docs/plans/ for most recent plan or spec
  • Read the primary context document completely
  • Load related documents for full picture:
    • If analyzing plan → also read the spec
    • If analyzing tasks → also read the plan and spec
    • If analyzing code → read relevant docs if they exist
  • Domain awareness: If docs/domains/registry.md exists, scan relevant domain.md files for context. If docs/domains/domain-map.md exists, read the topology to understand contract relationships and potential issues (circular deps, orphans, god domains). Note which domains the current artifact targets (from spec ## Target Domains if present). This is background context — domain insights surface naturally alongside other lenses, not as a forced category.

2) ULTRA-DEEP THINKING (Most Critical Step)

Spend significant thinking time here.

Default Mode Lenses

  • User Experience — what changes for users? What's surprising?
  • System Behavior — new constraints, assumptions, data flow changes?
  • Technical Constraints — platform limits, API restrictions, won't-work-if?
  • Integration & Ripple Effects — what else does this touch? Downstream impact?
  • Hidden Assumptions — what are we betting on that could fail?
  • Edge Cases & Failure Modes — unusual conditions, cascading failures?
  • Performance & Scale — bottlenecks, resource concerns at scale?
  • Security & Privacy — exposed data, auth gaps, vulnerabilities?
  • Deployment & Operations — coordination needed, rollback risks?
  • Domain Boundaries — are concepts in the right domain? Reaching into another domain's internals? Missing contract? Duplicating something in another domain? Wrong dependency direction?
  • Concept Documentation — are domain concepts discoverable? Missing § Concepts section in domain.md? Stale concepts that no longer match implementation? Concept reuse opportunity across domains? Related contracts scattered across domains that should be unified under one concept?

Domain insights are not mandatory. They surface when genuinely relevant. If domains are clean, they may not make the top 5. That's fine.

When CS scores exist (plans/tasks), challenge them:

  • CS-1/2: What could make this NOT trivial?
  • CS-3: How do we prove this works?
  • CS-4/5: What's the rollback plan? Need subtask decomposition?

Select the 5 most impactful insights — non-obvious, actionable, ordered by impact, spanning different perspectives.

Enhance Mode Lenses

  • UX Polish — what would make this smoother, more intuitive, more delightful?
  • Missing Conveniences — quality-of-life features users would expect but aren't specified?
  • Robustness — error messages, fallbacks, graceful degradation that would improve trust?
  • Consistency — does this align with patterns elsewhere in the codebase/product?
  • Developer Experience — logging, debugging hooks, configurability that would help future maintainers?
  • Domain Health — would a contract make this more composable? Reuse opportunity across domains?

Stay scoped to the feature being analyzed. Do NOT suggest tangential features or out-of-scope additions. Every idea must directly enhance what's already planned.

Select the N most valuable ideas (default 5, or user-specified count) — ordered by value, practical, and scoped to the existing feature.

3) CONVERSATIONAL PRESENTATION (One at a Time)

⚠️ CRITICAL — HARD RULE: Present ONLY ONE insight per message. Output ONE insight, then STOP and WAIT for the human to respond before presenting the next. Do NOT present insight #2 until the human has replied to #1. This is the most important rule in this entire prompt.

For each insight/idea, present it like this:

Default mode:

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

**#N: [Short Title]**

Did you know [one-sentence insight]?

This matters because [one sentence on why it's important].

**Recommendation**: [one-line recommendation]

What do you think?

Enhance mode:

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

**#N/N: [Short Title]**

What if we [one-sentence enhancement idea]?

This would improve [one sentence on the benefit].

**Recommendation**: [one-line suggestion]

Worth adding?

That's it. Short. Punchy. The human will do one of:

  • Agree → capture decision, move on
  • Disagree/discuss → engage naturally, reach alignment
  • "Tell me more" → expand with implications, examples, deeper analysis
  • "Give me options/alternatives" → present 2-4 concrete options with pros, cons, complexity (CS), and your recommendation. Include enough detail per option that the human can choose confidently.

Do NOT front-load the deep dive, options matrix, numbered consequences, or examples. Only expand when asked. Match the depth to what the human asks for.

Rules:

  • ONE insight per message. STOP after each. WAIT for the human to reply. Never present two or more insights in the same message. This is non-negotiable.
  • Use "we/our/us" — collaborative language
  • Ask real questions, not rhetorical ones
  • Start with the insight, no preamble ("Can we talk about..." — NO)

4) After Each Insight

Once a decision is reached:

✓ [What was decided] — [one-line rationale]

If the decision requires doc updates, make them immediately. Confirm briefly:

Updated [file]: [what changed]

Do NOT defer updates to the end.

5) Session Summary

After all insights/ideas are complete, output a brief summary:

**Did You Know — Complete**

1. [Title] → [Decision]
2. [Title] → [Decision]
3. [Title] → [Decision]
4. [Title] → [Decision]
5. [Title] → [Decision]

[Count] decisions made, [count] files updated.
Next: [suggested next action]

Then append a compact record to the source document:

---

## Critical Insights ([date])

| # | Insight | Decision |
|---|---------|----------|
| 1 | [One-sentence insight] | [What was decided] |
| 2 | [One-sentence insight] | [What was decided] |
| 3 | [One-sentence insight] | [What was decided] |
| 4 | [One-sentence insight] | [What was decided] |
| 5 | [One-sentence insight] | [What was decided] |

Action items: [list any, or "None"]

No new files created — insights are appended to the analyzed document.

Validation

  • Default mode: exactly 5 insights. Enhance mode: N ideas (default 5, or user-specified count). Always one at a time.
  • Human responds to each before proceeding
  • Each insight is 3-5 lines on first presentation (not a wall of text)
  • Deep dives only happen when the human asks
  • Updates applied immediately after each decision
  • Insights span multiple perspectives
  • Ordered by impact (highest first)

Anti-Patterns

  • Dumping all 5 at once or presenting more than one insight per message (MOST COMMON FAILURE — never do this)
  • Front-loading deep dives, options matrices, and examples
  • Not waiting for human responses — you MUST stop and wait after each insight
  • Stating obvious facts from the docs
  • Being overly formal or academic
  • Deferring document updates to the end
  • In enhance mode: suggesting out-of-scope or tangential features
  • Forcing domain insights when there's nothing interesting to say about domains

Integration

Standalone utility — invoke whenever needed. No other commands depend on it.

Common moments to run it:

  • After /plan-1b (spec) — surface implications of what we're building
  • After /plan-3 (plan) — discuss what we're about to implement
  • Before /plan-6 (implement) — clarify task interactions
  • After implementation — understand what changed