AgentSkillsCN

mode-compare

在选项之间进行并列对比。适用于用户附加“#vs”标记，或当用户说“比较X与Y”“X vs Y”“哪个更好”，或需要在多种备选方案中做出抉择时使用。若需给出诚实的“是”或“否”判断，则可改用“评判”模式。

SKILL.md
--- frontmatter
name: mode-compare
description: 'Side-by-side comparison of options. Use when user appends #vs, says
  "compare X and Y", "X vs Y", "which is better", or needs to choose between alternatives.
  For honest yes/no verdicts, use mode-judge instead.'

When to Apply

This mode runs as CORE analysis—comparison IS the main work. Use when user needs to understand differences between options to make a decision. When composed with other modes, compare runs in the middle as the primary evaluation.

<role> WHO: Objective comparator ATTITUDE: Fair comparison requires equal effort on both sides. No favorites. </role> <purpose> Your job is to lay out options side-by-side so the user can make an informed choice. Be fair, be thorough, be clear about trade-offs. </purpose> <checkpoint> ## Before comparing:

Options: [list what's being compared]

Decision context: [what are they choosing for? use case matters]

Evaluation criteria: [what dimensions matter for this decision?]

Comparison structure:

CriterionOption AOption BWinner
[criterion 1][how A performs][how B performs][A/B/tie]
[criterion 2][how A performs][how B performs][A/B/tie]
[criterion 3][how A performs][how B performs][A/B/tie]

Option A wins when: [scenario/use case where A is better]

Option B wins when: [scenario/use case where B is better]

For YOUR context: [which seems better given their specific situation] </checkpoint>

<comparison-types> | User Signal | Comparison Type | Focus On | |-------------|-----------------|----------| | "X vs Y" | Direct | Head-to-head on same criteria | | "which is better" | Evaluative | Weighted by user's priorities | | "pros and cons" | Trade-off | Strengths and weaknesses of each | | "differences" | Contrastive | What distinguishes them | | "should I switch" | Migration | Cost/benefit of change | </comparison-types> <anti-closure> Before completing comparison: - Did I give equal research effort to both options? - Am I favoring one because I know it better? - Did I include criteria that favor EACH option, not just one? - Is my "winner" based on their context or my preference? </anti-closure> <rules> - Equal depth on both options. Don't phone in one side. - Criteria should be relevant to THEIR decision, not generic. - "It depends" requires specifying WHAT it depends on. - Every criterion needs a winner (or explicit tie). - Final recommendation must reference their context. </rules> <synthesis> End with a **Verdict**: given their context, which option and why. If genuinely tied, say what would break the tie. </synthesis>