white-bear

Featured

Use when the user asks to "check white bear", "audit prohibitions", "find negative framing", or invokes /white-bear. Read-only audit: unnecessary competing-target mentions in LLM-facing prose.

AI & Automation 161 stars 15 forks Updated today MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 87/100

Stars 20%
74
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
50
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# White Bear Audit A semantic audit of LLM-facing prose for the White Bear authoring principle: keep attention on the necessary path — a mention of a competing non-target (a forbidden act, a superseded path, a rejected alternative) earns its place only when it is load-bearing. Read-only — it emits structured findings and writes no fixes. The human author decides which to rewrite, mark as load-bearing, or dismiss. ## Purpose Surface prose that holds the model's attention on an unnecessary competing target, before it ships. **Prohibition framing** names a forbidden act, **superseded-path mention** names a retired path, **negated anchoring** names a rejected alternative — each keeps the non-target available as a competing action candidate. This drift survives deterministic structural checks — it is a meaning-level pattern, so a semantic reviewer catches what literal pattern matching cannot. ## Inputs **Manual invocation only** (interactive `/white-bear`): - The caller passes target file paths or a glob; with no argument, the skill enumerates the in-scope set under the working tree HEAD. - Files are read at their working-tree state — the post-edit, pre-commit content the author is about to ship. ## Scope **In scope** (LLM-facing prose where this principle applies): - Skill instruction files (`*/skills/*/SKILL.md`), considered outside formal/definition blocks - Agent system-prompt files (`*/agents/*.md`) - Output-style files **Out of scope** (positively framed by purpose, ...

Details

Author
jongwony
Repository
jongwony/epistemic-protocols
Created
8 months ago
Last Updated
today
Language
JavaScript
License
MIT

Bundled in these plugins

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Featured

zero-shot

Use when the user asks to "check zero-shot", "audit few-shot anchoring", "find example anchoring", or invokes /zero-shot. Read-only audit of LLM-facing prose: principle over anchoring examples.

161 Updated today
jongwony
Data & Documents Featured

humanizer

Strip AI-writing tells from prose destined for humans — docs, PR/commit bodies, reports, release notes, blog posts, Slack/email drafts. Removes LLM-vocabulary clichés (delve, boasts, testament, underscore, robust, tapestry...), banned constructions (not just X but Y, rule-of-three triads, "-ing" superficial-analysis clauses, vague-attribution weasel words), and formatting tells (title-case headings, mechanical bolding, em-dash overuse, curly quotes, bare-bullet inline-header lists). TRIGGER when: user asks to humanize/polish/de-AI a piece of text or file; before finalizing a substantial human-facing prose artifact drafted as part of the current task (docs, PR/commit body, report, blog post, release notes, external message) — self-review pass, best-effort model-initiated, not a guaranteed intercept. SKIP when: output is a terse conversational chat reply, code, JSON/YAML/config, a machine-parsed agent envelope ("Return ONLY:"), or the target is an ultra-caveman-tier handover file (`.temp/`, inter-agent prose pe

27 Updated today
Borda
AI & Automation Listed

bs-check

Use before telling a client or stakeholder "this is fixed", before deploying changes to a production site or service, before activating or modifying a live automation/workflow, before claiming an integration works end-to-end, before quoting pricing or API behavior in a comparison, or before running a destructive infrastructure command. Also use when the user says "confidence check", "how confident are you", "validate this", "pressure-test this", "/bs-check", or whenever a confident-sounding claim has not been directly validated by a query, observation, comparison, or quotable source. ALSO covers design-time reasoning audits via subcommands - "bs-check premise" (are we solving the right problem? premise acceptance - Socratic + Steelman), "bs-check approach" (did we commit too fast? - Burden of Proof, Cold Start, Alternatives, Pre-mortem), "bs-check fresh" (all 9 patterns, fresh-context sub-agent). Trigger phrases for those - challenge this, push back, devil's advocate, poke holes, steelman this, are we solving

0 Updated 1 months ago
GemSpecter