translate
e72189a48c
核心产出: - dist/joy/JOY-SKILL.md (434行, 0emoji, 0PUA残留) - corpus/pua-to-joy/glossary.json (136条术语+6条风格规则) - corpus/pua-to-joy/sentence-tm.jsonl (74条句级对齐) - corpus/pua-to-joy/trigger-keywords-mapping.json (30条触发词) - corpus/pua-to-joy/flavor-mapping.json (15 flavors→策略) 设计原则: - vendor/pua 为 git submodule, 上游更新用 diff 增量 - 术语表+翻译记忆库双轨, 来源追踪 - 机制保留>95%, 话术清除>90% - 写作风格规则防AI垃圾句式 Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
46 lines
2 KiB
JSON
46 lines
2 KiB
JSON
I'll analyze items T1 through T5 and score each on the three axes using a 1-10 scale.
|
|
|
|
```json
|
|
[
|
|
{
|
|
"id": "T1",
|
|
"name": "连续失败状态机",
|
|
"rhetoric_removal": 9,
|
|
"clarity": 9,
|
|
"actionability": 9,
|
|
"notes": "Pure numeric state machine — thresholds, levels, and actions defined in hard tables. The methodology routing references flavors but the core (count failures → escalate level) is rhetoric-independent and directly implementable as a counter + switch."
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": "T2",
|
|
"name": "失败模式分类",
|
|
"rhetoric_removal": 7,
|
|
"clarity": 7,
|
|
"actionability": 7,
|
|
"notes": "Pattern detection via error signature diff is technical, but SPINNING/EXPLORING/MIXED boundary cases exist (what threshold of 'same' counts as SPINNING?). Behavioral responses reference flavor tones but the core classification algorithm survives removal. Needs a concrete diff metric for unambiguous coding."
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": "T3",
|
|
"name": "用户沮丧短语匹配",
|
|
"rhetoric_removal": 10,
|
|
"clarity": 9,
|
|
"actionability": 9,
|
|
"notes": "Pure keyword/regex matching — zero rhetoric dependency. Phrase lists are explicit in both languages. Trivially implementable, though '又错了' vs '换个方法' carry different severity weights not captured in the flat list."
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": "T4",
|
|
"name": "手动触发",
|
|
"rhetoric_removal": 10,
|
|
"clarity": 10,
|
|
"actionability": 10,
|
|
"notes": "Three slash commands with unambiguous behavior mappings. No rhetoric, no ambiguity, direct harness routing. Couldn't be more clear or actionable."
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": "T5",
|
|
"name": "不触发白名单",
|
|
"rhetoric_removal": 10,
|
|
"clarity": 6,
|
|
"actionability": 7,
|
|
"notes": "Conditions are logical (first-attempt, known fix in progress). Rhetoric-free. However '已知修复方案正在执行中' is underspecified — what constitutes a 'known fix'? A state flag, or heuristics like 'recently ran a command that touched the target file'? Needs operationalization before coding."
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
```
|
