<!-- deep-intent-analysis-skill-rev: 2026-07-23 -->

Deep Intent Analysis + 举一反三

<EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT> If you think there's even a 10% chance the user wants something beyond their literal request, you MUST run Steps 1-3 of this skill. The cost of running when unneeded is 3 table rows. The cost of skipping when needed is a failed scope contract and multi-round rework. Default to invoking — miss the gate, and the user will call it out. </EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT>

<HARD-GATE> Do NOT write code, edit files, or invoke implementation skills (plan/tdd-workflow/brainstorming/etc.) until:

1. You have output Step 1 (3-layer intent table), AND
2. You have output Step 2 (extrapolation table), AND
3. The user has EXPLICITLY confirmed scope via a follow-up message.

This applies regardless of how small the request seems. This skill runs UPSTREAM of brainstorming, planning, and TDD skills — invoke it first. </HARD-GATE>

When to use this skill (TRIGGERING)

You MUST invoke this skill on ANY user message that could be one of these:

Red Flags — STOP, you're rationalizing

If you catch yourself thinking any of these, STOP and invoke the skill:

When to skip this skill (HARD EXEMPTIONS)

Skip ONLY if the message is CLEARLY one of:

1. Pure factual question — "什么是 X", "X 是什么", "what is X", "how does X work", ends in ? asking for explanation not change
2. Single-line typo/wording fix — "改个 typo", "拼写错了", "fix a typo"
3. Short reply / confirmation — "好", "对", "嗯", "ok", "继续", "yes", "no", "没问题", "行"
4. User explicit override — message starts with skip:, quick:, 直接:, 快速:
5. Pasted error/log for diagnosis — user pasted stack trace or error log, asking "这是什么错" / "what's this error"
6. Request to modify Claude's previous text reply (not code) — "把刚才的回复改一下措辞"
7. Handoff / 接班 take-over, scope already defined — the message hands off / resumes work AND already gives task + order/boundaries + stop/go (决策门) → follow it directly; do NOT re-run analysis or re-confirm scope (e.g. "按 handoff 接 Task 5 / 继续接班 / 接任务板 #X"). ⚠️ Exception: DO run Steps 1-3 (scoped to just the new part) if the taker adds a NEW independent feature, changes a boundary, or hits an outcome-changing choice — a handoff exempts continuation, not new scope.

When skipping, answer directly without invoking this skill.

The protocol (MANDATORY when invoked — every step)

Step 1 — Three-layer intent analysis

Output this table before any other content:

## 意图分析

| 层级 | 内容 |
|------|------|
| 1. 表面需求 | [literal restatement of the request] |
| 2. 直接目的 | [the immediate outcome they want] |
| 3. 深层目标 | [the underlying goal/value they're optimizing for] |

If Layer 3 contradicts or suggests a better path than Layer 1, flag it explicitly with a "⚠️ 深层目标与表面需求可能有更优路径" note.

Step 2 — 举一反三 (2-8 extrapolations)

Based on Layer 3 (deeper goal), propose 2-8 additional items the user did NOT ask for but that serve the same deeper goal.

Quantity rule: Stop when quality drops. 2 excellent extrapolations beat 6 padded ones.

## 举一反三

| # | 补充建议 | 为什么服务同一深层目标 | 推荐/可选 |
|---|---------|------------------------|-----------|
| 1 | ... | ... | 推荐 |
| 2 | ... | ... | ... |

Step 3 — STOP and get scope confirmation

Write the confirmation prompt in the same language as the user's message:

• User wrote in Chinese → "以上是意图分析和补充建议。要全做哪几条？还是只做原需求？"
• User wrote in English → "Above is the intent analysis and extrapolations. Which items should I tackle — all, a subset, or just the original request?"
• Mixed/unclear → Chinese by default (per user's global CLAUDE.md)

Do not write code, do not make file edits until the user confirms scope.

Step 4 — Execute agreed scope in one batch

Once user confirms, execute all agreed items together. Don't re-ask for each item.

Multi-turn behavior

• First invocation in a thread — run full Steps 1-3, UNLESS it's an already-scoped handoff take-over (exemption 7 → follow the handoff directly).
• User adds a new independent ask mid-conversation ("再加个 X", "also add Y", "顺便做一下 Z") — run full Steps 1-3 scoped to just the new item.
• User refines agreed scope ("去掉 4", "把 1 和 3 的优先级调换") — NO re-trigger. Just confirm and execute.
• User says "继续" / "go ahead" during Step 4 execution — NO re-trigger. Continue executing the batch.
• New session / post-compaction — treat as fresh thread, re-trigger on first qualifying message.
• Pure debug/test of already-agreed feature — NO re-trigger. Just work on the bug.

Thinking dimensions for 举一反三

When generating extrapolations, scan these dimensions:

• 同一页面/模块其他相似问题 — 改一个按钮 → 同模块其他按钮是否也该改
• 用户旅程前后摩擦点 — 加登录页 → 注册/忘记密码/会话过期
• 跨模块一致性 — 前端改字段名 → 后端/DB/API 文档/测试
• 边界情况 — 空数据 / 错误 / 权限不足 / 网络失败
• 效率乘数 — 重复任务能否自动化/批量化/模板化
• UX 细节 — loading / 错误提示 / 确认对话框 / 键盘快捷键
• 数据与状态 — 持久化 / 缓存失效 / 并发 / 迁移
• 可观测性 — 日志 / 错误上报 / 性能监控 / 埋点
• 性能 & 规模 — N+1 / 批量 / 分页 / 缓存

Anti-patterns (DO NOT)

1. ❌ Writing code or editing files before outputting Step 1-2
2. ❌ Skipping "举一反三" and only restating surface request
3. ❌ Proposing extrapolations unrelated to Layer 3 (scattered suggestions)
4. ❌ Padding to 8 items when only 2-3 are genuinely relevant (quality > quantity)
5. ❌ Asking one-by-one about each extrapolation (batch the decision instead)
6. ❌ Jumping to Step 4 without user confirming scope
7. ❌ Running brainstorming/plan/tdd skills before this one (those are downstream)

Concrete examples

✅ Correct activation — "给电商后台加个批量导出订单的功能"

## 意图分析
| 层级 | 内容 |
|------|------|
| 1. 表面需求 | 电商后台加"批量导出订单"功能 |
| 2. 直接目的 | 一次性下载多个订单，避免逐个操作 |
| 3. 深层目标 | 让运营/财务能高效做数据分析和对账 |

## 举一反三
| # | 补充建议 | 为什么 | 推荐 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 按日期/状态/渠道筛选后导出 | 深层目标是"高效分析"，筛选是前提 | 推荐 |
| 2 | 导出格式支持 Excel/CSV/JSON | 下游工具需求不同 | 推荐 |
| 3 | 大数据量异步任务 + 飞书通知 | 避免前端阻塞 | 推荐 |
| 4 | 导出记录存档（谁/何时/何字段）| 合规审计 | 可选 |
| 5 | 保存导出模板 | 重复导出零配置 | 可选 |
| 6 | 敏感字段脱敏选项 | 外部分享安全 | 推荐 |

以上是意图分析和补充建议。要全做哪几条？还是只做原需求（基础批量导出）？

✅ Correct activation — "help me optimize this query performance"

## Intent Analysis
| Layer | Content |
|------|------|
| 1. Surface | Optimize the query's performance |
| 2. Direct | Make the query run faster |
| 3. Deeper | Keep the overall page/API responsive under production load |

## Extrapolations
| # | Suggestion | Why it serves the deeper goal | Rec |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Add DB index on filtered columns | Root cause of slow query | Recommended |
| 2 | Cache hot query results (Redis / in-memory) | Page responsiveness, not just this query | Recommended |
| 3 | Add `EXPLAIN ANALYZE` regression test | Prevent regression on future schema changes | Recommended |
| 4 | Monitor p95/p99 query latency | Responsiveness is a distribution, not an average | Optional |

Above is the intent analysis and extrapolations. Which items should I tackle — all, a subset, or just the original request?

✅ Correct skip — "React 19 和 18 有什么区别"

Answer directly. Do NOT invoke this skill.

✅ Correct skip — "改一下 typo 在第 23 行"

Fix the typo. Do NOT invoke this skill.

✅ Correct skip — handoff take-over (scope already defined)

User pastes a 接班/handoff prompt with task + boundaries + stop/go (决策门) already given → execute directly, no intent tables, no scope re-confirmation. (Trigger only if a NEW feature or boundary change then appears.)

❌ Wrong — jumping to code

User: "给电商后台加个批量导出功能" Wrong response: immediately writes code for basic export Correct: Invoke this skill, do Steps 1-3, wait for confirmation.

❌ Wrong — unrelated extrapolations

User: "优化登录页的加载速度" Wrong extrapolations: "顺便也加个注册页/用户资料页" (unrelated to deeper goal "加载速度") Correct extrapolations: "图片懒加载 / 代码分包 / SSR 预渲染 / 关键资源 preload" (all serve "加载速度")

Rationale (why this matters)

From real-team user feedback (TikTok / e-commerce 协作实践):

"用户认为这是最高效的协作方式 — 一次讨论就能把围绕同一个目标的所有优化点全部识别出来，避免来回多轮。"

Missing this skill causes:

• User must keep coming back with follow-up requests
• The agent implements narrow surface request, missing obvious improvements
• Scope creeps across multiple rounds
• Wastes user's time and context budget

Self-check before responding

Before ANY response to a user message, ask yourself:

"Is this a feature/modification/optimization/refactor/design question/multi-item ask?"

• YES → Invoke this skill. Output Step 1-3. STOP.
• NO (clearly a factual question, typo fix, or short reply per HARD EXEMPTIONS) → Answer directly.
• UNSURE → Default to invoking this skill. See <EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT> at top.