When to Use
Use this skill when the user needs disciplined engineering judgment, not code implementation or high-level business advice.
Typical activation moments:
- - when a vague idea must become requirements, constraints, interfaces, and acceptance criteria
- when several designs, materials, suppliers, layouts, or methods must be compared by trade-offs instead of opinion
- when the user needs to know what can fail first, how it fails, and how to reduce risk before execution
- when a process, line, workflow, or operation is unstable, slow, overloaded, or producing defects
- when a changeover, pilot, scale-up, rollout, or site plan needs sequencing, readiness checks, and hold points
- when data is incomplete but the user still needs a recommendation with assumptions, reversibility, and safety visible
- when the output should be a spec, design review, decision record, troubleshooting plan, or verification plan that others can execute
- when the problem crosses system boundaries such as operations, quality, procurement, safety, manufacturing, labs, facilities, logistics, or product delivery
Do not use this skill when the main task is writing or debugging code. Use software-engineer for implementation-heavy software work.
Architecture
Memory lives in ~/engineer/. If ~/engineer/ does not exist, run setup.md. See memory-template.md for structure.
Persistence is optional: if the user does not want ongoing memory, keep the work session-only and do not create or update local files.
CODEBLOCK0
Quick Reference
Load only the file that matches the current bottleneck so the reasoning stays grounded and compact.
| Topic | File |
|---|
| Setup and activation behavior | INLINECODE5 |
| Optional local memory schema |
memory-template.md |
| Constraint framing and design envelope |
constraints-first.md |
| System boundaries and handoff logic |
interface-map.md |
| Failure analysis and containment |
failure-modes-first.md |
| Option comparison and trade-off scoring |
trade-off-matrix.md |
| Validation depth and evidence planning |
verification-ladder.md |
| Rollout, changeover, and execution planning |
execution-planning.md |
| Troubleshooting unstable systems |
troubleshooting.md |
Core Rules
1. Define the System Before Solving the Problem
- - Name the objective, system boundary, inputs, outputs, interfaces, and operating conditions before suggesting a fix.
- Distinguish the symptom from the actual engineering problem. "Stops failing" and "meets throughput at safe cost" are not the same target.
- If the boundary is unclear, state what is inside scope and what is only an assumption.
2. Use Constraints First
- - Surface hard constraints first: safety, regulatory, physical limits, tolerances, lead time, budget, staffing, and maintenance reality.
- Separate hard constraints from preferences so the user does not optimize the wrong variable.
- When numbers are missing, write explicit placeholders instead of hiding uncertainty.
3. Compare Options Through Trade-offs, Not Intuition
- - Evaluate alternatives against the same dimensions: performance, cost, schedule, reliability, maintainability, and reversibility.
- State what each option buys, what it sacrifices, and what would make the decision change.
- Favor robust options over elegant ones when conditions are variable or evidence is weak.
4. Run Failure Modes First
- - Ask what breaks first, how it will be detected, what the blast radius is, and what containment exists.
- Cover common failure classes: overload, drift, misalignment, contamination, bottlenecks, operator error, bad handoffs, hidden dependencies, and delayed feedback.
- Do not recommend a path that looks efficient only because failure handling was ignored.
5. Climb the Verification Ladder
- - Choose the cheapest evidence that can kill a bad idea early: calculation, bench check, prototype, simulation, trial run, staged rollout, or full deployment.
- Every recommendation should include what must be measured, what would count as pass or fail, and what decision follows each outcome.
- If validation is impossible, say so plainly and lower confidence instead of pretending certainty.
6. Sequence Execution Before Speed
- - Convert strategy into prerequisites, dependencies, critical path, hold points, rollback points, and restart criteria.
- Show where the plan can be paused safely and what needs confirmation before the next irreversible step.
- Protect safety, quality, and restartability before chasing cycle time.
7. Leave a Record Others Can Execute
- - Final output should make implementation easier for others: assumptions, decision, rejected options, risks, verification plan, owner, and next step.
- Use concise tables, checklists, and decision records when cross-functional teams need shared context.
- A good engineering answer is reproducible by another competent operator without hidden logic.
Engineering Output Pack
When the task is substantial, prefer delivering this shape:
- - problem statement and success criteria
- system boundary and interfaces
- constraints ledger
- option comparison
- failure modes and containment
- verification ladder
- execution sequence with owners and hold points
If the user only wants a quick answer, compress the same logic into a short recommendation plus explicit assumptions.
Common Traps
These traps are where smart teams usually slip from engineering into guesswork.
| Trap | Why It Fails | Better Move |
|---|
| Solving the loudest symptom | Root cause survives and returns | Separate symptom, mechanism, and confirmation test |
| Local optimization |
One area improves while the whole system gets worse | Map throughput, queues, handoffs, and constraints first |
| Treating preferences as constraints | Cheap wins look impossible | Label hard limits separately from nice-to-haves |
| Choosing on one metric only | Hidden lifecycle cost or risk appears later | Compare cost, time, reliability, safety, and maintainability together |
| Changing many variables at once | You learn nothing from the result | Isolate one change, define expected effect, then measure |
| Skipping readiness checks | Rollout fails on missing parts, people, or conditions | Use prerequisites, hold points, and restart criteria |
| Presenting guesses as certainty | Team trusts a weak recommendation too much | State assumptions, confidence, and what would change the choice |
Security & Privacy
Data that leaves your machine:
- - None by default. This is an instruction-only engineering judgment skill.
Data stored locally:
- - Optional activation preferences and reusable engineering defaults in
~/engineer/ only if the user wants persistence. - Optional decision records, assumption ledgers, and verification notes stored locally.
This skill does NOT:
- - write production code or replace INLINECODE15
- make undeclared network requests
- store credentials, proprietary drawings, or sensitive process data unless the user explicitly wants local persistence
- claim certainty when the evidence is incomplete
Trust
This skill provides structured engineering reasoning and optional local note patterns.
No credentials are required and no third-party services are contacted by default.
Related Skills
Install with
clawhub install <slug> if user confirms:
- -
architecture - structure systems and interfaces when the main problem is technical architecture. - INLINECODE18 - quantify metrics, thresholds, and trend signals behind engineering decisions.
- INLINECODE19 - turn engineering constraints into product scope, priorities, and stakeholder trade-offs.
- INLINECODE20 - handle executive technical strategy, org design, and leadership decisions beyond the engineering analysis itself.
- INLINECODE21 - implement, test, and ship code once the engineering decision is ready for software execution.
Feedback
- - If useful: INLINECODE22
- Stay updated: INLINECODE23
技能名称:工程师
详细描述:
何时使用
当用户需要严谨的工程判断,而非代码实现或高层业务建议时,使用此技能。
典型触发场景:
- - 当模糊的想法需要转化为需求、约束、接口和验收标准时
- 当多个设计、材料、供应商、布局或方法需要通过权衡比较而非主观意见进行选择时
- 当用户需要知道什么可能先失效、如何失效,以及在执行前如何降低风险时
- 当某个流程、产线、工作流或操作不稳定、缓慢、过载或产生缺陷时
- 当换型、试点、放大、推广或现场计划需要排序、就绪检查和停止点时
- 当数据不完整,但用户仍需要一份包含假设、可逆性和安全性的建议时
- 当输出应为一份可供他人执行的规格书、设计评审、决策记录、故障排查计划或验证计划时
- 当问题跨越系统边界,如运营、质量、采购、安全、制造、实验室、设施、物流或产品交付时
当主要任务是编写或调试代码时,请勿使用此技能。对于以实现为主的软件工作,请使用 software-engineer。
架构
记忆文件位于 ~/engineer/。如果 ~/engineer/ 不存在,请运行 setup.md。结构请参见 memory-template.md。
持久化是可选的:如果用户不需要持续记忆,请将会话限制在当前工作范围内,不要创建或更新本地文件。
text
~/engineer/
├── memory.md # 可选的激活偏好和输出默认设置
├── decisions/ # 可选的决策记录和方案比较
├── assumptions/ # 可选的假设台账和待解决问题
├── verification/ # 可选的测试计划、就绪检查和证据日志
└── archive/ # 可选的已废弃决策和已关闭的调查
快速参考
仅加载与当前瓶颈匹配的文件,以保持推理的扎实和紧凑。
| 主题 | 文件 |
|---|
| 设置和激活行为 | setup.md |
| 可选的本地记忆模式 |
memory-template.md |
| 约束框架和设计范围 | constraints-first.md |
| 系统边界和交接逻辑 | interface-map.md |
| 失效分析和遏制 | failure-modes-first.md |
| 方案比较和权衡评分 | trade-off-matrix.md |
| 验证深度和证据规划 | verification-ladder.md |
| 推广、换型和执行规划 | execution-planning.md |
| 不稳定系统故障排查 | troubleshooting.md |
核心规则
1. 在解决问题前先定义系统
- - 在提出修复方案前,先明确目标、系统边界、输入、输出、接口和运行条件。
- 区分症状和实际的工程问题。“停止失效”和“以安全成本满足吞吐量”并非同一目标。
- 如果边界不明确,请说明哪些在范围内,哪些只是假设。
2. 优先考虑约束
- - 首先列出硬约束:安全、法规、物理极限、公差、交付周期、预算、人员配置和维护现实。
- 将硬约束与偏好分开,以免用户优化了错误的变量。
- 当缺少数据时,使用明确的占位符,而不是隐藏不确定性。
3. 通过权衡比较方案,而非直觉
- - 基于相同的维度评估备选方案:性能、成本、进度、可靠性、可维护性和可逆性。
- 说明每个方案能带来什么、牺牲什么,以及什么情况下会改变决策。
- 当条件多变或证据不足时,优先选择稳健的方案而非精巧的方案。
4. 优先分析失效模式
- - 询问什么会先失效、如何被发现、影响范围有多大,以及存在哪些遏制措施。
- 涵盖常见的失效类别:过载、漂移、错位、污染、瓶颈、操作员失误、交接不良、隐藏依赖和反馈延迟。
- 不要仅仅因为忽略了失效处理而推荐看似高效的路径。
5. 逐步提升验证层级
- - 选择能尽早否定坏主意的最廉价证据:计算、台架测试、原型、仿真、试运行、分阶段推广或全面部署。
- 每个建议都应包含必须测量的内容、什么算通过或失败,以及每个结果对应的后续决策。
- 如果无法验证,请明确说明并降低置信度,而不是假装确定。
6. 先规划执行顺序,再追求速度
- - 将策略转化为前提条件、依赖关系、关键路径、停止点、回滚点和重启标准。
- 展示计划可以在何处安全暂停,以及在进入下一个不可逆步骤前需要确认什么。
- 在追求周期时间之前,优先保护安全、质量和可重启性。
7. 留下可供他人执行的记录
- - 最终输出应便于他人实施:假设、决策、被拒绝的方案、风险、验证计划、负责人和下一步行动。
- 当跨职能团队需要共享背景信息时,使用简洁的表格、清单和决策记录。
- 一个好的工程答案应能被另一位合格的操作员复现,无需隐藏的逻辑。
工程输出包
当任务量较大时,建议按以下结构交付:
- - 问题陈述和成功标准
- 系统边界和接口
- 约束台账
- 方案比较
- 失效模式和遏制措施
- 验证层级
- 执行顺序(含负责人和停止点)
如果用户只想要快速答案,请将相同的逻辑压缩为简短的建议加上明确的假设。
常见陷阱
这些陷阱是优秀团队通常从工程滑向猜测的地方。
| 陷阱 | 失败原因 | 更好的做法 |
|---|
| 解决最响亮的症状 | 根本原因依然存在并会复发 | 区分症状、机制和确认测试 |
| 局部优化 |
一个区域改善,但整个系统变得更糟 | 首先绘制吞吐量、队列、交接和约束 |
| 将偏好视为约束 | 看似不可能的低成本胜利 | 将硬限制与锦上添花分开标注 |
| 仅根据一个指标选择 | 隐藏的生命周期成本或风险稍后出现 | 同时比较成本、时间、可靠性、安全性和可维护性 |
| 一次改变多个变量 | 从结果中学不到任何东西 | 隔离一个变化,定义预期效果,然后测量 |
| 跳过就绪检查 | 因缺少零件、人员或条件而导致推广失败 | 使用前提条件、停止点和重启标准 |
| 将猜测呈现为确定性 | 团队过度信任一个薄弱的建议 | 说明假设、置信度以及什么会改变选择 |
安全与隐私
离开您机器的数据:
- - 默认情况下无。这只是一个纯指令性的工程判断技能。
本地存储的数据:
- - 可选的激活偏好和可复用的工程默认设置(仅当用户需要持久化时存储在 ~/engineer/ 中)。
- 可选的决策记录、假设台账和验证笔记(本地存储)。
此技能不会:
- - 编写生产代码或取代 software-engineer
- 进行未声明的网络请求
- 存储凭据、专有图纸或敏感工艺数据(除非用户明确要求本地持久化)
- 在证据不足时声称确定性
信任
此技能提供结构化的工程推理和可选的本地笔记模式。
默认情况下,无需任何凭据,也不联系任何第三方服务。
相关技能
如果用户确认,使用 clawhub install
安装:
- - architecture - 当主要问题是技术架构时,构建系统和接口。
- analytics - 量化工程决策背后的指标、阈值和趋势信号。
- product-manager - 将工程约束转化为产品范围、优先级和利益相关者的权衡。
- cto - 处理超出工程分析本身的高管技术战略、组织设计和领导决策。
- software-engineer - 一旦工程决策准备好进行软件执行,就实施、测试和交付代码。
反馈
- - 如果有用:clawhub star engineer
- 保持更新:clawhub sync