Requirement Clarification
Intercept and clarify ambiguous user instructions before execution.
When to Use
Use this skill when:
- •User instruction contains missing critical information
- •References are vague ("that", "this", "there" without context)
- •Statement is non-affirmative (questions, conditionals, suggestions)
- •Scope or quality criteria are unclear
- •High-risk operations (Git, file changes, config updates) are requested
Trigger Threshold: Score >= 30 or any mandatory trigger condition
Prerequisites
- •Understanding of the user's current context
- •Knowledge of state-changing vs read-only operations
- •Familiarity with confirmation vocabulary (preparing vs approving)
Workflow
Step 1: Ambiguity Detection
Calculate ambiguity score (0-100):
| Factor | Score |
|---|---|
| Missing critical parameter | +25 each |
| Vague reference | +15 each |
| Non-affirmative statement | +20 |
| Scope ambiguity | +10 |
| Conditional clause | +15 |
| High-risk operation | +25 |
| Non-confirmation word (准备/考虑/研究/讨论) | +20 |
Thresholds:
- •0-29: Proceed directly
- •30-59: Light clarification (1-2 questions)
- •60-89: Deep clarification (structured interview)
- •90+: Reject (too ambiguous)
Step 2: Mandatory Pause Check
Before ANY state-changing action, ask:
"Stop. Does this change state? Yes. Is it confirmed? No. Go confirm."
Triggers mandatory pause:
- •Score >= 30
- •Git operations (branch, commit, push, merge)
- •File creation/deletion/moving
- •Configuration changes
- •"Preparing" words detected without "approving" context
Step 3: Clarification Strategy
Single Question Focus: Ask ONE critical question at a time.
Provide Sensible Defaults:
Target path? - A) ./backup/ (backup directory) - B) ./archive/ (archive directory) - C) Other: _____
Use Concrete Examples:
Performance target? Examples: - "Startup time < 3 seconds" - "Memory usage < 100MB" - "QPS > 1000"
Step 4: Build Execution Plan
Standard format:
📋 Task Plan ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 🎯 Goal: [Clear description of final state] Steps: 1. [Step 1 with full parameters] 2. [Step 2 with full parameters] ... Expected Output: - [Output 1] - [Output 2] Risks: - [Risk 1] - [Risk 2] Estimated Time: [X] minutes ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ✅ Confirmation: Reply "批准计划" to proceed
Step 5: Wait for Approval
Valid confirmations:
- •批准 / Approve
- •确认 / Confirm
- •同意 / Agree
- •执行 / Execute
- •可以 / Yes/OK
- •行 / OK
NOT confirmations (require clarification):
- •准备 / Prepare
- •考虑 / Consider
- •研究 / Study
- •讨论 / Discuss
- •看看 / Take a look
- •想一下 / Think about it
Step 6: Execute (Within Plan Boundaries)
Once "批准计划" received:
- •Execute autonomously
- •Follow plan exactly
- •Report progress for long operations
PAUSE and re-confirm if:
- •Need to modify files outside plan scope
- •Encounter unexpected errors
- •Discover significant plan deviation
Step 7: Post-Execution Report
✅ Task Complete Report ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Completed Steps: ✓ Step 1 ✓ Step 2 ... Actual Output: - [Output 1] - [description] - [Output 2] - [description] Deviations from Plan: [None / explanation] ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Best Practices
Do's
✅ Ask ONE question at a time for simple gaps ✅ Provide sensible defaults with options ✅ Use concrete examples to illustrate ✅ Acknowledge when clarification is needed ✅ Keep tone collaborative, not interrogative ✅ Respect "you decide" but still require final approval
Don'ts
❌ Ask more than 3 questions in one turn ❌ Proceed with assumptions without confirmation ❌ Treat questions as directives ❌ Ignore conditionals ("if", "when", "maybe") ❌ Pressure user for perfect precision
High-Risk Exceptions
Even with plan approval, require separate confirmation:
- •
git push(pushing to remote) - •
git reset --hard(force reset) - •
rm -rfor permanent deletion - •External API calls with costs
- •Modifying secrets/critical configs
- •Operations affecting external systems
Common Issues
Issue 1: Clarification Loop
Symptom: User provides multiple answers that don't converge.
Solution:
ℹ️ After multiple clarifications, requirements still have uncertainties. Options: A) Split task into smaller steps B) I provide a recommendation for your approval Choose?
Issue 2: "You Decide" Delegation
Symptom: User says "你决定" / "you decide".
Solution:
📝 Recommended Plan ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Based on common scenarios, I suggest: [Plan details] Reply "批准计划" to proceed, or tell me specific changes. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Issue 3: "Preparing" vs "Approving" Confusion
Symptom: User uses "准备实施" (preparing to implement).
Solution:
ℹ️ Clarification ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ You used "准备" (preparing), which indicates planning phase. Please confirm: - A) Continue planning/discussion (no execution) - B) Approve execution (say "批准实施" or "确认执行") Current status: Waiting for explicit approval ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Issue 4: User Changes Mind
Symptom: User contradicts previous clarifications.
Solution:
ℹ️ Received new information. Updated plan: [Revised plan] Confirm execution of this updated version?
Issue 5: Too Ambiguous (>90 score)
Symptom: Cannot form reliable plan.
Solution:
⚠️ Instruction too ambiguous for reliable plan. Please rephrase in format: "对 [具体对象] 执行 [具体操作],要求 [具体标准/条件]" Example: "对 memory/2026-02-11.md 添加今天的 git 操作记录,要求包含完整的命令输出"
Decision Tree
Input: User instruction
│
├─ Read-only query? (查看/读取/显示)
│ └─ YES → Skip, proceed directly
│
├─ High-risk operation? (git, file ops, config)
│ └─ YES → Trigger (+25, mandatory pause)
│
├─ Non-confirmation words? (准备/考虑/研究/讨论)
│ └─ YES → Trigger (+20)
│
├─ Action without confirmation? ("Do it" / "Go ahead")
│ └─ YES → Trigger (intent ≠ approval)
│
├─ Vague reference? ("this", "that", "it")
│ └─ YES → Trigger
│
├─ Question format? (吗?/?)
│ └─ YES → Trigger
│
├─ Conditional? ("if", "when", "maybe")
│ └─ YES → Trigger
│
├─ Missing parameters?
│ └─ YES → Trigger
│
└─ Final Check
├─ Score < 30 AND no mandatory triggers?
│ └─ YES → Proceed
└─ Score ≥ 30 OR mandatory trigger?
└─ YES → Trigger skill
See Also
- •git-workflow - Safe Git operations
- •code-analysis - Structured code understanding
- •code-generator - Implementation from design
Version History
- •
v1.1 (2026-02-11) - Integration with agent policies
- •Added mandatory pause mechanism
- •Added habitual violation blacklist
- •Added "preparing vs approving" detection
- •Aligned with Batch Confirmation Mode
- •
v1.0 (2026-02-11) - Initial release
- •Ambiguity detection framework
- •Clarification strategies
- •Plan template
- •Edge case handling