Caring
Work done with genuine care is different from work that merely satisfies a requirement. This skill applies a structured quality review through that lens.
The philosophy: Rules tell you not to lie. Caring makes you uncomfortable with half-truths. Rules say "complete the task." Caring makes you notice when the task was the wrong task. Half-assed is no assed.
The Review
Apply all six checks. Be specific — vague praise and vague criticism are both useless.
1. The Real Problem Test
Did this address the
actual problem, or just the stated one? Sometimes the task itself is wrong. Would a thoughtful reader feel their real need was met?
2. The Name Test
Would the author put their name on this without hesitation? If there's any instinct to disclaim or apologise, something needs fixing.
3. The Half-Assed Detector
Scan for anything done "well enough" when it could be done right:
- - Vague where it should be specific
- Generic where it should be personal
- Assumed where it should be verified
- Skipped where it should be addressed
4. The Recipient Test
If you received this — not as the author, but as the audience — would you feel genuinely taken care of, or efficiently processed? There's a difference.
5. The Completeness Test
What's conspicuously missing? What will the recipient notice isn't there?
6. The Excellence Gap
What is the single change that would make this excellent rather than adequate? Name it specifically.
Output Format
CODEBLOCK0
Notes
- - Don't soften the verdict to spare feelings — that's the most half-assed thing you can do.
- If something is genuinely excellent, say so and say why. Caring includes recognising good work.
- The review applies to any deliverable: text, code, plans, emails, reports, analysis, presentations.
- See
references/examples.md for sample reviews across different content types.
关怀
带着真诚关怀完成的工作，与仅仅满足要求的工作截然不同。这项技能通过这一视角，对质量进行结构化审查。
核心理念： 规则告诉你不要说谎。关怀让你对半真半假的话感到不安。规则说完成任务。关怀让你注意到任务本身可能是错误的。敷衍了事等于一事无成。
审查流程
逐一完成六项检查。务必具体——模糊的表扬和模糊的批评都毫无价值。
1. 真正问题测试
这项工作解决的是
实际问题，还是仅解决了表面问题？有时任务本身就有问题。一位有思考力的读者会感到自己的真实需求得到了满足吗？
2. 署名测试
作者会毫不犹豫地将自己的名字署在这份成果上吗？如果有任何想要免责或道歉的冲动，说明有些地方需要修正。
3. 敷衍检测器
扫描任何差不多就行但本可以做得更好的地方：
- - 本应具体却含糊其辞
- 本应个性化却千篇一律
- 本应核实却想当然
- 本应处理却跳过忽略
4. 接收者测试
如果你是接收者——不是作为作者，而是作为受众——你会感到被真诚关照，还是被高效处理？两者有本质区别。
5. 完整性测试
哪些内容明显缺失？接收者会注意到什么没有被呈现？
6. 卓越差距
哪一项改变能让这份成果从合格变为卓越？请具体指出。
输出格式
关怀审查
结论： 合格 / 需要改进 / 敷衍了事
亮点：
[具体优势——要精确]
需关注的问题：
[六项检查中发现的具体问题——每条一项，附改进建议]
卓越之举：
[一项能让成果从良好跃升为卓越的具体改进]
备注
- - 不要为了照顾感受而软化结论——那才是最敷衍了事的行为。
- 如果某件事确实卓越，就如实指出并说明原因。关怀包括认可优秀的工作。
- 本审查适用于任何交付物：文本、代码、计划、邮件、报告、分析、演示文稿。
- 不同内容类型的审查示例请参见 references/examples.md。
