reset-context-contamination

Solid

Discard the accumulated drafts and framings from this thread and re-derive the task from a clean problem statement.

AI & Automation 31 stars 2 forks Updated 3 days ago MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 83/100

Stars 20%
50
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
49
Issue Health 10%
80
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

This thread's history has become the problem - prior drafts and framings are anchoring every new attempt. Reset. First, extract what's worth keeping, in plain factual terms: who is involved, the outcome I want, the hard constraints, the known facts, and - critically - what's already been tried and ruled out, so a fresh derivation doesn't walk back into a dead end. Then pick the path by severity: - Deep contamination, or anything high-stakes: do not try to reset yourself - the contaminated model cannot be trusted to author its own reset. Hand the extracted brief to a fresh subagent, or recommend I start a new session. A genuinely clean context window is the only reliable reset. - Mild drift only: re-derive in-thread from the extracted brief, as if seeing the task for the first time. Void the earlier drafts entirely - no referencing, quoting, or patching them. If you are unsure the brief itself is right, show it to me before drafting; otherwise just proceed.

Details

Author
tenequm
Repository
tenequm/skills
Created
8 months ago
Last Updated
3 days ago
Language
Python
License
MIT

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Listed

ground-first

Use BEFORE acting whenever getting it wrong has real cost — in ANY domain, not just infra. Fire for complex or multi-step work; irreversible or hard-to-undo actions; anything touching production, shared state, real user data, money/payments, security/credentials, schema/migrations, external APIs/integrations, concurrency, or a change rippling across many call sites; and debugging where acting on the wrong root cause makes it worse. Judge the REAL work from your own understanding, not keywords — a request can say "payment" or "migrate" or "refactor" and be a one-line cosmetic edit, while a plain-sounding one is deeply consequential. It splits what you KNOW from what you're ASSUMING, surfaces the silent failure modes, and verifies your riskiest assumptions before the irreversible step. Do NOT use for trivial reversible edits — renames of a local symbol, typos, comments, formatting, cosmetic tweaks.

0 Updated 4 days ago
88plug
AI & Automation Listed

reground

Halt a drifting agent and re-anchor it to codebase evidence for the current task, clearing speculative context without a full compaction. Use when the agent has gone off course, hallucinated files/APIs/behavior, or started over-building beyond what was asked — or when the user types /reground or says "stop", "re-ground", "re-crown", "I don't see evidence for that", or "you're building something we don't need".

3 Updated today
adamlinscott
AI & Automation Listed

task-intake

Mandatory alignment gate before modifying code, files, or configuration — restate the requirement, surface assumptions, enumerate scenarios with expected outcomes, then STOP and wait for explicit user approval before writing any implementation code. Use at the start of any task that involves changing code, files, or configuration in a repository, especially multi-file or multi-step changes. Skip the gate only for pure Q&A, pure explanation, or tiny changes where the user explicitly said "just do it" — the implementation invariants still always apply. For vague greenfield ideas that are not yet concrete tasks, use idea-to-spec first; for triaging issues in unfamiliar codebases, use progressive-abstraction.

0 Updated 2 days ago
HelloWorldU