[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M75CDBHHTV54DMPAR476JKAF":3,"skill-same:01M75CDBHHTV54DMPAR476JKAF":48},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":9,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":15,"categories":16,"keywords":17,"publishedAt":18,"linkOnly":19,"markdownContent":20,"markdownBody":21,"frontMatter":22,"refName":25,"commitSha":26,"skillDirectory":27,"forksCount":28,"repositoryHtmlUrl":29,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":30,"ownerBlogUrl":31,"ownerDescription":32,"updatedAt":33,"install":34,"resources":47},"01M75CDBHHTV54DMPAR476JKAF","best-of-n",null,"Generate a small set of independent candidate solutions in worktrees, judge them against one explicit rubric, and apply the winner only after PASS verification.","blissito\u002Fghostycode","blissito","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F156516539?v=4","01M75CD3QJEZD682BR625QD3QA","01M75CD3RB12C1P572X9DRE503",8,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fblissito\u002Fghostycode\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcrates\u002Ftui\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fbest-of-n\u002FSKILL.md",[],[],"2026-11-12 13:55:43",false,"---\nname: best-of-n\ndescription: Generate a small set of independent candidate solutions in worktrees, judge them against one explicit rubric, and apply the winner only after PASS verification.\nmetadata:\n  short-description: Compare independent candidates\n---\n\n# Best of N\n\nUse this skill when a consequential design, implementation, explanation, or\ndebugging task has several plausible solutions and comparison is worth the\nextra model work. In Operate mode this is the preferred ensemble pattern for\nhigh-stakes or ambiguous approaches. Do not use it for a tiny change or when\nthe user has already chosen the approach.\n\n## Set The Tournament\n\n1. Define one task, one evidence packet, and one explicit scoring rubric before\n   launching candidates. Include correctness, fit to the request, simplicity,\n   risk, and verification.\n2. Choose `N` from 2 to 4 for a quick comparison (default 3). For an explicit\n   experimental search, use the Workflow search option: 2–16 live candidates,\n   with larger validated populations queued at the Workflow host's 16-worker\n   concurrency gate rather than launched at once.\n3. Give every candidate the same task and rubric. Add only a candidate number;\n   do not steer candidates toward different conclusions unless diversity is an\n   explicit part of the request.\n4. Prefer a session goal (`create_goal` or active `\u002Fgoal`) when the tournament\n   spans more than one parent turn.\n\n## Generate Independently\n\nStart the candidates as parallel background `agent` workers and return agent_ids\nimmediately so the parent stays free. For proposals, reviews, or research, keep\nthem read-only:\n\n```json\n{\n  \"action\": \"start\",\n  \"name\": \"candidate_1\",\n  \"prompt\": \"Produce candidate 1 for the task below. Return the proposal, evidence, risks, and rubric self-score. Do not edit files.\\n\\n\u003CTASK AND RUBRIC>\",\n  \"type\": \"worker\",\n  \"model_strength\": \"same\",\n  \"write_authority\": \"read_only\"\n}\n```\n\nLaunch the remaining candidates with the same contract, then use `agent` wait\nor completion events to collect every result. Do not show one candidate another\ncandidate's answer before generation finishes.\n\nWhen candidates must implement code, give each one:\n\n- `type: \"builder\"`\n- `worktree: true`\n- `write_authority: \"worktree_write\"`\n- the same bounded `write_roots` or `exact_files`\n\nNever run parallel writers in the parent checkout. Each builder must return\nthe structured candidate contract (candidate id, hypothesis, paths, commands,\nself-verdict, risks, and artifact references). A self-verdict is evidence to\ninspect, not a hard-gate result.\n\nOptional diversity: pin different `model` \u002F Fleet `fleet_profile` values when\nthe project has multiple capable routes; otherwise keep model strength `same`.\n\n## Judge Once\n\nUse one read-only reviewer worker, or the parent when the result is small, to\nscore all candidates against the original rubric. The judge must:\n\n- cite evidence from each candidate rather than vote by style;\n- reject candidates that violate authority, scope, or verification gates;\n- treat candidate-reported commands and PASS claims as untrusted until replay;\n- name the winner and the decisive reasons;\n- identify useful pieces worth combining, if any;\n- say when the candidates are tied or all fail.\n\nDo not ask candidates to vote for themselves. Do not silently merge incompatible\napproaches into a new unreviewed solution.\n\n## Integrate Only After PASS\n\nFor proposal-only work, return the winning answer with a compact score summary.\nFor code work:\n\n1. Freeze the baseline, evaluator, hard gates, score rule, and authority before\n   a larger search admits candidates. Any evaluator change starts a revision.\n2. After a worker loses write authority, apply its patch to a clean baseline\n   and let the runtime—not that worker—run hard gates and scoring.\n3. Inspect the winning worktree diff and independently replay it on the clean\n   baseline. A different read-only model may look for gaming, but deterministic\n   tests remain the authority.\n4. Present the verified winner for review. Applying or merging is a separate,\n   explicit user action; `NONE` is valid when every candidate fails.\n5. Preserve losing and failed candidate receipts as useful negative results.\n\nThe checked-in `operate_best_of_n.workflow.js` recipe supports\n`strategy: \"search\"` for structured 2–16 candidate generation and review. It\ndoes **not** yet turn prompt-listed commands into hidden runtime gates. Do not\nadvertise those gates until the runtime evaluator host consumes a frozen\n`WorkflowSearchSpec`.\n\nStop early when one candidate reveals a hard constraint that invalidates the\ntournament. Report the negative result rather than spending the remaining\nbudget to manufacture variety.\n","# Best of N\n\nUse this skill when a consequential design, implementation, explanation, or\ndebugging task has several plausible solutions and comparison is worth the\nextra model work. In Operate mode this is the preferred ensemble pattern for\nhigh-stakes or ambiguous approaches. Do not use it for a tiny change or when\nthe user has already chosen the approach.\n\n## Set The Tournament\n\n1. Define one task, one evidence packet, and one explicit scoring rubric before\n   launching candidates. Include correctness, fit to the request, simplicity,\n   risk, and verification.\n2. Choose `N` from 2 to 4 for a quick comparison (default 3). For an explicit\n   experimental search, use the Workflow search option: 2–16 live candidates,\n   with larger validated populations queued at the Workflow host's 16-worker\n   concurrency gate rather than launched at once.\n3. Give every candidate the same task and rubric. Add only a candidate number;\n   do not steer candidates toward different conclusions unless diversity is an\n   explicit part of the request.\n4. Prefer a session goal (`create_goal` or active `\u002Fgoal`) when the tournament\n   spans more than one parent turn.\n\n## Generate Independently\n\nStart the candidates as parallel background `agent` workers and return agent_ids\nimmediately so the parent stays free. For proposals, reviews, or research, keep\nthem read-only:\n\n```json\n{\n  \"action\": \"start\",\n  \"name\": \"candidate_1\",\n  \"prompt\": \"Produce candidate 1 for the task below. Return the proposal, evidence, risks, and rubric self-score. Do not edit files.\\n\\n\u003CTASK AND RUBRIC>\",\n  \"type\": \"worker\",\n  \"model_strength\": \"same\",\n  \"write_authority\": \"read_only\"\n}\n```\n\nLaunch the remaining candidates with the same contract, then use `agent` wait\nor completion events to collect every result. Do not show one candidate another\ncandidate's answer before generation finishes.\n\nWhen candidates must implement code, give each one:\n\n- `type: \"builder\"`\n- `worktree: true`\n- `write_authority: \"worktree_write\"`\n- the same bounded `write_roots` or `exact_files`\n\nNever run parallel writers in the parent checkout. Each builder must return\nthe structured candidate contract (candidate id, hypothesis, paths, commands,\nself-verdict, risks, and artifact references). A self-verdict is evidence to\ninspect, not a hard-gate result.\n\nOptional diversity: pin different `model` \u002F Fleet `fleet_profile` values when\nthe project has multiple capable routes; otherwise keep model strength `same`.\n\n## Judge Once\n\nUse one read-only reviewer worker, or the parent when the result is small, to\nscore all candidates against the original rubric. The judge must:\n\n- cite evidence from each candidate rather than vote by style;\n- reject candidates that violate authority, scope, or verification gates;\n- treat candidate-reported commands and PASS claims as untrusted until replay;\n- name the winner and the decisive reasons;\n- identify useful pieces worth combining, if any;\n- say when the candidates are tied or all fail.\n\nDo not ask candidates to vote for themselves. Do not silently merge incompatible\napproaches into a new unreviewed solution.\n\n## Integrate Only After PASS\n\nFor proposal-only work, return the winning answer with a compact score summary.\nFor code work:\n\n1. Freeze the baseline, evaluator, hard gates, score rule, and authority before\n   a larger search admits candidates. Any evaluator change starts a revision.\n2. After a worker loses write authority, apply its patch to a clean baseline\n   and let the runtime—not that worker—run hard gates and scoring.\n3. Inspect the winning worktree diff and independently replay it on the clean\n   baseline. A different read-only model may look for gaming, but deterministic\n   tests remain the authority.\n4. Present the verified winner for review. Applying or merging is a separate,\n   explicit user action; `NONE` is valid when every candidate fails.\n5. Preserve losing and failed candidate receipts as useful negative results.\n\nThe checked-in `operate_best_of_n.workflow.js` recipe supports\n`strategy: \"search\"` for structured 2–16 candidate generation and review. It\ndoes **not** yet turn prompt-listed commands into hidden runtime gates. Do not\nadvertise those gates until the runtime evaluator host consumes a frozen\n`WorkflowSearchSpec`.\n\nStop early when one candidate reveals a hard constraint that invalidates the\ntournament. Report the negative result rather than spending the remaining\nbudget to manufacture variety.\n",{"name":5,"metadata":23,"description":7},{"short-description":24},"Compare independent candidates","main","c025ba29f3a55734ac05ff16ba677765a2845cfb","crates\u002Ftui\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fbest-of-n",0,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fblissito\u002Fghostycode","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fblissito","https:\u002F\u002Ffixtergeek.com","Off-grid developer writing code since 1999 🤓","2026-11-01 19:47:50",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":35,"prompt":45,"zipAvailable":46},[36,39,42],{"tool":37,"command":38},"npx","npx skills add blissito\u002Fghostycode --skill best-of-n",{"tool":40,"command":41},"bunx","bunx skills add blissito\u002Fghostycode --skill best-of-n",{"tool":43,"command":44},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add blissito\u002Fghostycode --skill best-of-n","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fblissito\u002Fghostycode\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcrates\u002Ftui\u002Fassets\u002Fskills\u002Fbest-of-n\u002FSKILL.md",true,[],[49,56,63,70,77,84],{"skillNo":50,"name":51,"nameZh":6,"description":52,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":9,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":53,"categories":54,"keywords":55,"publishedAt":18},"01M75CGWC29615C661HTEGXVTH","gh-treasure-hunt","Hunt the issue\u002FPR queue for highest value-over-risk wins: clean focused community PRs, already-implemented issues to close, safe quick-fixes.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fblissito\u002Fghostycode\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fdocs\u002Fskills\u002Fgh-treasure-hunt\u002FSKILL.md",[],[],{"skillNo":57,"name":58,"nameZh":6,"description":59,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":9,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":60,"categories":61,"keywords":62,"publishedAt":18},"01M75CGTGM88WWQKNKB7G3F688","gh-find-prs","Survey open GhostyCode PRs and triage each for mergeability and disposition against the real landing branch.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fblissito\u002Fghostycode\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fdocs\u002Fskills\u002Fgh-find-prs\u002FSKILL.md",[],[],{"skillNo":64,"name":65,"nameZh":6,"description":66,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":9,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":67,"categories":68,"keywords":69,"publishedAt":18},"01M75CGQ1REETJFS53P5V9KH3E","gh-file-issue","Use when filing a new GhostyCode GitHub issue: turn a bug or idea into a well-formed, actionable issue with repro, acceptance criteria, labels, and milestone.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fblissito\u002Fghostycode\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fdocs\u002Fskills\u002Fgh-file-issue\u002FSKILL.md",[],[],{"skillNo":71,"name":72,"nameZh":6,"description":73,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":9,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":74,"categories":75,"keywords":76,"publishedAt":18},"01M75CGK915XTS0EG9F4NSVZ6G","gh-credit-harvest","Harvest one community PR into a release branch with authorship and credit preserved, verified green, and a warm thank-you.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fblissito\u002Fghostycode\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fdocs\u002Fskills\u002Fgh-credit-harvest\u002FSKILL.md",[],[],{"skillNo":78,"name":79,"nameZh":6,"description":80,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":9,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":81,"categories":82,"keywords":83,"publishedAt":18},"01M75CGH3767G7218T7FV4TGM8","gh-compile-issues","Triage N GitHub issues into a coverage matrix: fetch each, check current code, classify already-done\u002Fquick-fix\u002Fdesign\u002Fdefer with cited evidence.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fblissito\u002Fghostycode\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fdocs\u002Fskills\u002Fgh-compile-issues\u002FSKILL.md",[],[],{"skillNo":85,"name":86,"nameZh":6,"description":87,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":9,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":88,"categories":89,"keywords":90,"publishedAt":18},"01M75CGF7A38RNP14045E43Q1R","gh-close-issues","Close resolved GhostyCode issues only after verifying the landed commit\u002Fbehavior, with a positive crediting comment; never from title alone.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fblissito\u002Fghostycode\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fdocs\u002Fskills\u002Fgh-close-issues\u002FSKILL.md",[],[]]