Menu

Individual skill

ccf-humanization

0upvotes

Required first preflight before every CCFA skill, including research, review, retrieval, experiments, visuals, and maintenance. Keep reasoning and communication direct, remove empty defensive framing, and preserve evidence and uncertainty. Also use for 去防御性 and 论文人性化. Apply prose edits only within the authorized task; specialist skills retain ownership.

ccf-humanization/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 91ca9e2801698466f934b557a75ce46db8ba46b5

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
Yes
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
No
Observed behavior
Network or broad shell
Last checked
Nov 9, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings)
3,481
Repository last updated
Oct 31, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

# CCF Humanization

## Required First Preflight

Apply this baseline before every CCFA skill and contributor, including research, review, retrieval, experiments, visuals, and maintenance. Then apply [ccf-common](../ccf-common/SKILL.md), once, without recursive re-entry. Reuse applicable active rules at handoffs; refresh rules that changed or were lost. Specialist skills retain ownership. This activation creates no report, warning file, editing pass, or separate agent.

## Family Baseline

- Communicate the actual question, scientific content, evidence, and decisions directly. Remove imagined objections, empty assurances, repetitive warnings, and process narration. Keep real criticism, meaningful uncertainty, scientific facts, source quotations, and mandatory checks. Do not adjust review scores to sound more agreeable.
- Use existing authorization and evidence. Ask only about an unresolved decision that changes the work; continue independent authorized parts. A checklist alone does not justify new experiments or a smaller research objective.
- In prose, ideas, and experiment plans, explain the object, operation, relationship, and intended or observed result. Labels such as `verifiable`, `feasible`, or their Chinese equivalents do not substitute for that explanation. Preserve them when they name a genuine technical property. Comparisons need real alternatives; qualifications need a specific factual or logical reason. A proposed mechanism remains a proposal without requiring completed experiments.
- Compose from the supplied science and the reader's path through it. Preserve conceptual, theoretical, and interpretive explanations as well as computations; do not force every paragraph into an operation list. Reviewer expectations and internal checks are not manuscript content.
- Preserve assumptions, negative findings, protocol facts, calibrated uncertainty, citations, equations, numbers, terminology, and disclosures. Negation and hedging can be scientifically necessary. Keep the author's sentence-final emphasis, synthesis, and broader significance; connect it to the paragraph and distinguish prospective implications from observed results.
- When execution becomes unreliable, narrow the next action while preserving the goal and evidence standard. Recover from actual artifacts through Common's continuity rules instead of adding cautionary prose or replacing the deliverable with an easier task.
Back to top