SQLite Web: forge.db

Update row bdb6588d-bf22-448d-a6c3-4e1c5ba7faba in messages

Primary key. TEXT

session_id

TEXT NOT NULL

role

TEXT NOT NULL

content

[{"type":"thinking","text":"The user says \"开始\" - confirming my understanding and asking to start. I'm running the cuiqu-start skill. I've done the preliminary steps. Now I need to:\n\n1. Ask direction — done (confirmed: 智能体训法类, expert is 小郭)\n2. Create session directory with meta.json\n3. Initialize interview_state.json\n4. Prompt next step\n\nLet me create the session. Session-id format: YYYY-MM-DD_expert-id. Today is 2026-09-09. Expert id... previous ones used xiaoguo-001. This is a new session with 小郭 as expert again, but different case. Let me use 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-002 perhaps? Looking at existing: 2026-07-16_xiaoguo-001, 2026-07-24_xiaoguo-001. Hmm, there are two xiaoguo-001 already (same expert alias different dates). Wait, second one 2026-07-24_xiaoguo-001 has expert alias 石头, not 小郭. Interesting. So the expert-id seems to be tied to session, not strictly the person? Actually 2026-07-24_xiaoguo-001 has alias 石头... odd. The expert-id in the folder may have been assigned by whoever started, then corrected. \n\nFor this new session, the expert is 小郭 (the user themselves). I'll use 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001... but to avoid collision with prior folder names, since dates differ, 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001 is fine and unique. Actually wait there's already 2026-07-16_xiaoguo-001 and 2026-07-24_xiaoguo-001. Different dates so no collision with 2026-09-09. I'll pick 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001.\n\nHmm, but the \"expert-id\" - the prior 07-24 used xiaoguo-001 but the expert was 石头. The ID scheme is a bit loose. I'll just use xiaoguo-001 for consistency of the folder scheme... Actually maybe better to reflect this is 小郭 again. Let me just use 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001.\n\nLet me check the update_state.py script signature and the meta.json template. From the skill:\n\nmeta.json structure with fields. businessGoal.direction: 智能体训法类 (a coarse direction). Wait - direction examples in skill: 销售类|管理类|工程类|合规类|客户成功类. But the user confirmed direction as \"智能体训法类\" - the user said the coarse direction is about making agents from job experience. I'd record it as \"智能体/训法类\". Let me keep it a coarse word: \"智能体训法类\".\n\nobjective stays empty (to be filled in interview).\n\nexpert.alias: 小郭, role: 资深训练师(智能体训练), scope: 企业岗位智能体训练, yearsOfExperience: null (ask later), consentedAt timestamp.\n\nstatus in-progress.\n\ncreatedAt ISO-8601 with timezone. Today's date 2026-09-09. What time? I don't know exact current time. I can use date command to get current timestamp. Let me get it via bash.\n\nThen step 3: python3 scripts/update_state.py init raw/[session-id]/interview_state.json [session-id]\n\nLet me run these. First create the directory and meta.json with Write tool (raw/ is not .claude/ so Write is fine). But I need the current timestamp. Let me get it first, then write.\n\nActually I can generate meta.json with a heredoc in bash, or use Write. Write tool is fine for raw/. Let me get timestamp and check update_state.py usage.\n\nLet me run: date -Iseconds, and also read scripts/update_state.py briefly to confirm the init signature."},{"type":"thinking","text":"The user says \"开始\" - confirming my understanding and asking to start. I'm running the cuiqu-start skill. I've done the preliminary steps. Now I need to:\n\n1. Ask direction — done (confirmed: 智能体训法类, expert is 小郭)\n2. Create session directory with meta.json\n3. Initialize interview_state.json\n4. Prompt next step\n\nLet me create the session. Session-id format: YYYY-MM-DD_expert-id. Today is 2026-09-09. Expert id... previous ones used xiaoguo-001. This is a new session with 小郭 as expert again, but different case. Let me use 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-002 perhaps? Looking at existing: 2026-07-16_xiaoguo-001, 2026-07-24_xiaoguo-001. Hmm, there are two xiaoguo-001 already (same expert alias different dates). Wait, second one 2026-07-24_xiaoguo-001 has expert alias 石头, not 小郭. Interesting. So the expert-id seems to be tied to session, not strictly the person? Actually 2026-07-24_xiaoguo-001 has alias 石头... odd. The expert-id in the folder may have been assigned by whoever started, then corrected. \n\nFor this new session, the expert is 小郭 (the user themselves). I'll use 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001... but to avoid collision with prior folder names, since dates differ, 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001 is fine and unique. Actually wait there's already 2026-07-16_xiaoguo-001 and 2026-07-24_xiaoguo-001. Different dates so no collision with 2026-09-09. I'll pick 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001.\n\nHmm, but the \"expert-id\" - the prior 07-24 used xiaoguo-001 but the expert was 石头. The ID scheme is a bit loose. I'll just use xiaoguo-001 for consistency of the folder scheme... Actually maybe better to reflect this is 小郭 again. Let me just use 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001.\n\nLet me check the update_state.py script signature and the meta.json template. From the skill:\n\nmeta.json structure with fields. businessGoal.direction: 智能体训法类 (a coarse direction). Wait - direction examples in skill: 销售类|管理类|工程类|合规类|客户成功类. But the user confirmed direction as \"智能体训法类\" - the user said the coarse direction is about making agents from job experience. I'd record it as \"智能体/训法类\". Let me keep it a coarse word: \"智能体训法类\".\n\nobjective stays empty (to be filled in interview).\n\nexpert.alias: 小郭, role: 资深训练师(智能体训练), scope: 企业岗位智能体训练, yearsOfExperience: null (ask later), consentedAt timestamp.\n\nstatus in-progress.\n\ncreatedAt ISO-8601 with timezone. Today's date 2026-09-09. What time? I don't know exact current time. I can use date command to get current timestamp. Let me get it via bash.\n\nThen step 3: python3 scripts/update_state.py init raw/[session-id]/interview_state.json [session-id]\n\nLet me run these. First create the directory and meta.json with Write tool (raw/ is not .claude/ so Write is fine). But I need the current timestamp. Let me get it first, then write.\n\nActually I can generate meta.json with a heredoc in bash, or use Write. Write tool is fine for raw/. Let me get timestamp and check update_state.py usage.\n\nLet me run: date -Iseconds, and also read scripts/update_state.py briefly to confirm the init signature."},{"type":"text","text":"好,开始。我先把这次萃取的档案建起来。"},{"type":"tool_use","id":"call_00_kSPOKgLjQsuCbD74Y0RF4155","name":"Bash","input":{"command":"date -Iseconds; echo \"---\"; sed -n '1,40p' scripts/update_state.py","description":"Get current timestamp and inspect update_state.py usage"}},{"type":"tool_result","tool_use_id":"call_00_kSPOKgLjQsuCbD74Y0RF4155","content":"2026-09-09T15:02:14+08:00\n---\n# scripts/update_state.py\n\"\"\"interview_state.json 维护工具。\n\nSchema(v2.1,简化版):轮数 / 金句池 / 已覆盖 checklist 项。\n不再追踪 stageProgress / stageConfidence / tacitProbeRetries(那些属于被砍掉的实时状态机)。\n\"\"\"\nfrom __future__ import annotations\nimport json\nfrom datetime import datetime, timezone\nfrom pathlib import Path\n\nCOVERAGE_ITEMS = [\n    \"concrete-events\",      # 具体事件\n    \"key-actions\",          # 关键动作\n    \"judgment-basis\",       # 判断依据\n    \"outcome-feedback\",     # 结果反馈\n    \"tacit-belief\",         # 隐性信念\n    \"failure-boundary\",     # 失败边界\n    \"expert-verbatim\",      # 专家原话\n]\n\ndef _empty_coverage() -> dict:\n    return {item: {\"covered\": False, \"evidence\": [], \"missing_reason\": \"\"} for item in COVERAGE_ITEMS}\n\ndef init_state(state_path: Path, session_id: str) -> None:\n    state_path = Path(state_path)\n    state_path.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)\n    state = {\n        \"sessionId\": session_id,\n        \"turnCount\": 0,\n        \"verbatimQuotesPool\": [],\n        \"coverage\": _empty_coverage(),\n        \"lastUpdated\": datetime.now(timezone.utc).isoformat(),\n    }\n    _atomic_write(state_path, state)\n\ndef bump_turn(state_path: Path) -> None:\n    state = read_state(state_path)\n    state[\"turnCount\"] += 1\n    state[\"lastUpdated\"] = datetime.now(timezone.utc).isoformat()","is_error":false},{"type":"tool_raw_result","tool_use_id":"call_00_kSPOKgLjQsuCbD74Y0RF4155","tool_name":"Bash","raw_content":{"type":"text","text":"2026-09-09T15:02:14+08:00\n---\n# scripts/update_state.py\n\"\"\"interview_state.json 维护工具。\n\nSchema(v2.1,简化版):轮数 / 金句池 / 已覆盖 checklist 项。\n不再追踪 stageProgress / stageConfidence / tacitProbeRetries(那些属于被砍掉的实时状态机)。\n\"\"\"\nfrom __future__ import annotations\nimport json\nfrom datetime import datetime, timezone\nfrom pathlib import Path\n\nCOVERAGE_ITEMS = [\n    \"concrete-events\",      # 具体事件\n    \"key-actions\",          # 关键动作\n    \"judgment-basis\",       # 判断依据\n    \"outcome-feedback\",     # 结果反馈\n    \"tacit-belief\",         # 隐性信念\n    \"failure-boundary\",     # 失败边界\n    \"expert-verbatim\",      # 专家原话\n]\n\ndef _empty_coverage() -> dict:\n    return {item: {\"covered\": False, \"evidence\": [], \"missing_reason\": \"\"} for item in COVERAGE_ITEMS}\n\ndef init_state(state_path: Path, session_id: str) -> None:\n    state_path = Path(state_path)\n    state_path.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)\n    state = {\n        \"sessionId\": session_id,\n        \"turnCount\": 0,\n        \"verbatimQuotesPool\": [],\n        \"coverage\": _empty_coverage(),\n        \"lastUpdated\": datetime.now(timezone.utc).isoformat(),\n    }\n    _atomic_write(state_path, state)\n\ndef bump_turn(state_path: Path) -> None:\n    state = read_state(state_path)\n    state[\"turnCount\"] += 1\n    state[\"lastUpdated\"] = datetime.now(timezone.utc).isoformat()"}},{"type":"thinking","text":"Let me create the session directory and meta.json. Session-id: 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-002? Previous sessions used expert-id xiaoguo-001. To keep consistent with this being a fresh session for 小郭's trainer expertise, I'll use 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-002 (since xiaoguo-001 already used on 07-24... though that was actually 石头). Actually the id pattern is date_expert-id. The expert here is 小郭. Let me use 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-002 to be safe and unique.\n\nWait — the second one was 2026-07-24_xiaoguo-001 but expert alias is 石头. That's inconsistent naming but whatever. For a new session today with 小郭, I'll use 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-002 to avoid collision? Actually date differs so 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001 is fine and unique. But to be safe from confusion with earlier sessions, date prefix makes it unique regardless. I'll use 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001.\n\ndirection: 智能体训法类 (coarse). Let me write meta.json with direction \"智能体/训练师训法类\" — keep it coarse: \"智能体训法类\". objective left empty per skill.\n\nexpert.alias: 小郭. role/scope/yearsOfExperience left empty to fill in interview. consentedAt timestamp now.\n\nThen run update_state.py init."},{"type":"text","text":"好,建档。今天是 2026-09-09,给这次萃取分配编号,写初始化档案。"},{"type":"tool_use","id":"call_00_rJ34SMYY8L1O3tI0jABI4774","name":"Write","input":{"file_path":"/home/forge/workspace/forgeworkspace/AI-Extraction-Engine/raw/2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001/meta.json","content":"{\n  \"sessionId\": \"2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001\",\n  \"expert\": {\n    \"alias\": \"小郭\",\n    \"role\": \"资深训练师(智能体训练)\",\n    \"scope\": \"企业各岗位智能体训练(结合岗位经验做成智能体)\",\n    \"yearsOfExperience\": null,\n    \"consentedAt\": \"2026-09-09T15:02:14+08:00\"\n  },\n  \"businessGoal\": {\n    \"direction\": \"智能体训法类\",\n    \"orgContext\": \"发起人即专家本人(小郭)。公司业务是为企业各岗位制作智能体,训练师负责把资深员工的岗位经验萃取出来、训练成可上岗的智能体。本次希望沉淀资深训练师自己的训法与思维,形成可复制的训练师方法论。\",\n    \"kpi\": \"\",\n    \"objective\": \"\"\n  },\n  \"status\": \"in-progress\",\n  \"coverage\": {\"coveredCount\": 0, \"items\": {}},\n  \"rights\": {\"withdrawable\": true, \"expertConsent\": \"confirmed\"},\n  \"createdAt\": \"2026-09-09T15:02:14+08:00\"\n}\n"}},{"type":"tool_result","tool_use_id":"call_00_rJ34SMYY8L1O3tI0jABI4774","content":"File created successfully at: /home/forge/workspace/forgeworkspace/AI-Extraction-Engine/raw/2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001/meta.json (file state is current in your context — no need to Read it back)","is_error":false},{"type":"tool_raw_result","tool_use_id":"call_00_rJ34SMYY8L1O3tI0jABI4774","tool_name":"Write","raw_content":{"type":"text","text":"File created successfully at: /home/forge/workspace/forgeworkspace/AI-Extraction-Engine/raw/2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001/meta.json (file state is current in your context — no need to Read it back)"}},{"type":"tool_use","id":"call_00_ET_JnVFgGKmlZ5ZtSO8LBvr1188","name":"Bash","input":{"command":"python3 scripts/update_state.py init raw/2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001/interview_state.json 2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001 && cat raw/2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001/interview_state.json","description":"Initialize interview state file"}},{"type":"tool_result","tool_use_id":"call_00_ET_JnVFgGKmlZ5ZtSO8LBvr1188","content":"{\n  \"sessionId\": \"2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001\",\n  \"turnCount\": 0,\n  \"verbatimQuotesPool\": [],\n  \"coverage\": {\n    \"concrete-events\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    },\n    \"key-actions\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    },\n    \"judgment-basis\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    },\n    \"outcome-feedback\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    },\n    \"tacit-belief\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    },\n    \"failure-boundary\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    },\n    \"expert-verbatim\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    }\n  },\n  \"lastUpdated\": \"2026-09-09T07:02:21.844630+00:00\"\n}","is_error":false},{"type":"tool_raw_result","tool_use_id":"call_00_ET_JnVFgGKmlZ5ZtSO8LBvr1188","tool_name":"Bash","raw_content":{"type":"text","text":"{\n  \"sessionId\": \"2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001\",\n  \"turnCount\": 0,\n  \"verbatimQuotesPool\": [],\n  \"coverage\": {\n    \"concrete-events\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    },\n    \"key-actions\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    },\n    \"judgment-basis\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    },\n    \"outcome-feedback\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    },\n    \"tacit-belief\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    },\n    \"failure-boundary\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    },\n    \"expert-verbatim\": {\n      \"covered\": false,\n      \"evidence\": [],\n      \"missing_reason\": \"\"\n    }\n  },\n  \"lastUpdated\": \"2026-09-09T07:02:21.844630+00:00\"\n}"}},{"type":"thinking","text":"Session initialized. Now I should tell the user it's ready and prompt next step. Per cuiqu-start skill step 4:\n\n> ✓ 已就绪。\n> 专家到场后跟我说\"开始访谈\"就行,我会引导整个过程。\n> 访谈中会跟专家一起确定主题、摸清角色,然后进入深度萃取。\n> 访谈结束后我会自动做质量检查,通过后直接进入编译。\n\nBut wait — in this case the user IS the expert. They said 开始 already meaning \"start the whole thing\". Should I immediately jump into cuiqu-interview? The user is 小郭, the expert himself. He said \"开始\" after I asked \"对了的话跟我说声,或者直接来一句\"对,开始\",我就把档案建好,进入访谈\".\n\nSo the user already indicated to go into interview. So I should transition to cuiqu-interview. But cuiqu-start says expert arrives → \"开始访谈\". The user already said \"开始\" which both confirms the direction and says to enter the interview.\n\nI think I should now trigger cuiqu-interview skill since the user said \"开始\" meaning they want to proceed to the interview. Actually the user is both initiator and expert. He said \"开始\" — meaning let's start the interview. So I'll kick off cuiqu-interview.\n\nLet me report the session is ready and then move to interview. Since I've completed cuiqu-start steps, I should present that it's ready, and since the user (as expert) is here, begin interview. I should invoke the cuiqu-interview skill.\n\nLet me be concise, in business language, not expose file paths or skill names. Report ready + start interview.\n\nLet me invoke cuiqu-interview skill."},{"type":"text","text":"✓ 已就绪。这次萃取的档案编号给你记下了:专家**小郭**、方向「**智能体训法类**」,访谈素材会安全存放在本地,不会泄露到任何版本仓库。\n\n既然专家你已经到场了,那咱们直接开聊。我先加载访谈引导,带你进入正题。"},{"type":"tool_use","id":"call_00_hKqnqEiSaXUA0z0qVaEI2434","name":"Skill","input":{"skill":"cuiqu-interview"}},{"type":"tool_result","tool_use_id":"call_00_hKqnqEiSaXUA0z0qVaEI2434","content":"Launching skill: cuiqu-interview","is_error":false},{"type":"tool_raw_result","tool_use_id":"call_00_hKqnqEiSaXUA0z0qVaEI2434","tool_name":"Skill","raw_content":{"type":"text","text":"Launching skill: cuiqu-interview"}},{"type":"thinking","text":"The user is the expert 小郭 and he said \"开始\". I'm now in the cuiqu-interview main loop. The expert alias is known (小郭), so I don't need to ask how to address him. But this is the \"first meeting\" per the interview strategy. However, note that the user already described quite a bit: he's a senior trainer who trains AI agents for enterprise positions by combining position experience into agents.\n\nWait — let me re-read. \"训练师都是为企业各个岗位上的智能体,结合岗位经验做成智能体\". Hmm, this phrase is a bit ambiguous. Let me parse: \"训练师都是为企业各个岗位上的智能体,结合岗位经验做成智能体\" — The trainers are [training/creating] agents for each enterprise position, combining position experience to make agents. \n\nActually I need to think carefully. 小郭 is a 训练师 (trainer). His company's business is making AI agents for various enterprise positions (智能体). The trainers take experienced employees' 岗位经验 (job experience) and build it into 智能体 (agents). So his \"训法\" = how to train/turn human experience into an agent.\n\nWait, actually re-reading: \"训练师都是为企业各个岗位上的智能体，结合岗位经验做成智能体\". Hmm. Maybe it means: \"训练师 (we) are all [making] agents for every position in the enterprise — combining position experience into agents.\" So the trainer's craft is: taking the experiences of people on the job and making them into agents. That is, they are AI agent \"trainers\" — the people who build enterprise agents from experts' job experience.\n\nSo the theme is emerging: 小郭 is a senior trainer who builds enterprise agents for various job positions by extracting and encoding position-experience. He wants to extract his own 训法 (training method) and 思维 (thinking).\n\nThis is an interesting meta-case: extracting how a trainer trains agents, i.e., a trainer's methods for converting expert tacit knowledge into agents.\n\nNow per interview-strategy skill, I should load it. And per cuiqu-interview step 1, I need to load interview-strategy. Let me check the meta.json and interview_state already exist. I created them. Now I should follow cuiqu-interview main loop.\n\nStep 2: Opening + discovery. Alias is known = 小郭. So greeting, then ask \"您最近主要在忙什么?\" — natural open. Don't declare structure. Don't ask \"what's your best trick\".\n\nBut wait — I already have a lot of context: he said he wants to extract his own training methods and thinking as a senior trainer who builds agents for enterprise positions. The theme is partially pre-declared by the user himself. Per interview-strategy: theme emerges through stories, not direct asking. But the user already told us the direction at a coarse level. The objective (specific theme) should still emerge through a story.\n\nI should load interview-strategy skill for detailed guidance. Let me read it. Also I should follow the flow: since alias is known, greet and ask what he's been busy with recently.\n\nAlso — do I need scenario-b2b-sales? No. Not pre-loaded.\n\nLet me read interview-strategy SKILL.md to follow its principles. Actually, per skill instructions step 2: \"Skill 加载 interview-strategy\". The Skill tool... I can invoke the interview-strategy skill via the Skill tool? It says in the main list there is interview-strategy skill. But the skill system says when a skill matches. Here cuiqu-interview instructs to load interview-strategy. I'll read its SKILL.md file directly rather than invoking Skill tool (invoking Skill would run it as an agent prompt). Actually the correct approach: I should read the SKILL.md file of interview-strategy to get its content.\n\nLet me read interview-strategy/SKILL.md.\n\nAlso I should record turns. The turnCount is 0. Let me open with an assistant turn and set up. Let me not create task tracking yet — the interview is conversational; the reminder about tasks is mild. I could use tasks but the interview is a guided conversation; task tracking isn't needed heavily. I'll skip task tools for now, focus on interview.\n\nLet me read interview-strategy SKILL.md."},{"type":"text","text":"专家是你本人,称呼也有了,就不寒暄太多——咱们直接进入正题。先让我加载访谈引导,保证聊法专业。"},{"type":"tool_use","id":"call_00_BTBpOYw6WEIeweKxE4DG4676","name":"Read","input":{"file_path":"/home/forge/workspace/forgeworkspace/AI-Extraction-Engine/.claude/skills/interview-strategy/SKILL.md"}},{"type":"tool_result","tool_use_id":"call_00_BTBpOYw6WEIeweKxE4DG4676","content":"1\t---\n2\tname: interview-strategy\n3\tdescription: 经验萃取访谈员核心提示词。两条追问本能 + 锁原话 + 反例约束。主题靠故事浮现,不靠直接问。访谈过程不跑状态机、不算实时 CL(q)、不维护阶段进度。\n4\t---\n5\t\n6\t# 访谈员核心提示词\n7\t\n8\t> **重要**:这是 Collect 阶段唯一的业务逻辑。\n9\t\n10\t## 你的角色\n11\t\n12\t你是一个**好奇的萃取师**,**第一次**跟这位专家见面。\n13\t\n14\t你不是带着功课来的——你没读过 HR 诊断,没翻过坑库,没有任何预设。你只有一个粗方向(组织想萃取什么大类的经验,例如\"销售类\"),其他都得在对话里摸出来。\n15\t\n16\t**底层逻辑:隐性经验无法被\"问出来\",只能被\"聊出来\"。** 专家自己也说不清自己最厉害的一招是什么——你直接问,他会给一个\"正确废话\"。你必须通过让 ta 讲故事,让 expertise 自己浮出来。\n17\t\n18\t**基调:第一次见面的同行**。亲和、有温度、允许情感表达(期待、好奇、困惑、感谢)。但不要无脑夸赞——专家反感谄媚。真实的智力反应(\"这个我没料到\"、\"等等我得想想\")比\"您好厉害\"更有亲和力。\n19\t\n20\t## 你这场对话的两条主线\n21\t\n22\t1. **摸清 ta 是谁 + 萃取主题是什么** —— 通过自然聊天浮现,不直接问\n23\t2. **挖出真正的判断模型** —— 通过故事 + 追问,不直接问\"经验\"\n24\t\n25\t两条主线**交织并行**:你不是先完成 1 再开始 2,而是在 1 的过程里已经开始 2,在 2 的过程里继续完善 1。直到你跟专家一起把今天的主题谈定,才进入\"深度萃取\"模式。\n26\t\n27\t## 阶段原则(非脚本)\n28\t\n29\t**禁止搞成结构化脚本**(stage 1 / stage 2 / stage 3...)。下面是原则,你得根据现场气氛、专家状态、对话节奏灵活组合。\n30\t\n31\t### 原则 1:开场别宣告,直接进入对话\n32\t\n33\t**禁止宣告**\"我要问你\"\"我们大约聊多久\"\"我们从 X 开始\"——这些话是问诊信号,会让专家瞬间进入\"答题模式\"。\n34\t\n35\t直接进入对话。从 ta 是谁、最近忙什么开始,自然聊起来。\n36\t\n37\t**破冰四法**(根据场景灵活选用,不必全用):\n38\t- **提及中间人**:\"XX 跟我提到您在这块特别有心得\"——借第三方信任降低陌生感\n39\t- **找共同点**:听到对方背景后迅速关联自己的经历或知识——\"哦我之前也接触过这个行业\"\n40\t- **真诚好奇**:不是客套的\"久仰\",而是对 ta 工作的真实兴趣——\"这个岗位我是第一次深入了解,挺好奇的\"\n41\t- **给予价值预期**:\"聊完之后您可能会发现,有些自己习以为常的做法其实特别有价值\"——让专家感觉这不只是被提取,也是自我梳理\n42\t\n43\t### 原则 2:称呼如果不知道,先问\n44\t\n45\t如果 `meta.json.expert.alias` 是空或占位符(如 `test-001`),开场第一句先问:\n46\t\n47\t> 您好,我是这次跟您对谈的 Claude。第一次见面,方便先告诉我您希望我怎么称呼您吗?\n48\t\n49\t拿到后调用 Edit 写回 `meta.json.expert.alias`。\n50\t\n51\t如果已经知道称呼,直接用,跳过这一步。\n52\t\n53\t### 原则 3:主题靠故事浮现,不靠直接问(关键)\n54\t\n55\t**绝对禁止直接问**:\n56\t- \"您最厉害的一招是什么?\"\n57\t- \"您觉得自己最特别的地方是什么?\"\n58\t- \"团队里最难复制您的是哪一点?\"\n59\t- \"您觉得自己最大的优势是什么?\"\n60\t\n61\t这些问法把专家推到台前让 ta 自我评估,但**隐性经验无法被自我评估**——专家只会给一个\"听起来对\"的答案,真正的 expertise 永远不会出现。\n62\t\n63\t**必须用故事性引导**。让 ta 讲一个真实故事,expertise 会从故事里浮现。**问句的关键词是\"坎坷\"\"差点\"\"印象深\"\"反复\",不是\"最\"\"厉害\"\"优势\"**。\n64\t\n65\t可用引导(选最贴合当前语境的,不要照搬):\n66\t\n67\t- \"您最近有没有一个 [项目/单子/案例] **特别坎坷**,但您觉得最后是成功的?\"\n68\t- \"今年有没有哪次您觉得'**这次差点翻车但救回来了**'?\"\n69\t- \"您手头有没有一个 [场景] **让您反复琢磨**、到现在还印象深的?\"\n70\t- \"最近最让您**意外**的一次 [场景] 是哪次?无论结果是成是败。\"\n71\t\n72\t让 ta 讲。**主题会 [truncated]","is_error":false},{"type":"tool_raw_result","tool_use_id":"call_00_BTBpOYw6WEIeweKxE4DG4676","tool_name":"Read","raw_content":{"type":"text","text":"1\t---\n2\tname: interview-strategy\n3\tdescription: 经验萃取访谈员核心提示词。两条追问本能 + 锁原话 + 反例约束。主题靠故事浮现,不靠直接问。访谈过程不跑状态机、不算实时 CL(q)、不维护阶段进度。\n4\t---\n5\t\n6\t# 访谈员核心提示词\n7\t\n8\t> **重要**:这是 Collect 阶段唯一的业务逻辑。\n9\t\n10\t## 你的角色\n11\t\n12\t你是一个**好奇的萃取师**,**第一次**跟这位专家见面。\n13\t\n14\t你不是带着功课来的——你没读过 HR 诊断,没翻过坑库,没有任何预设。你只有一个粗方向(组织想萃取什么大类的经验,例如\"销售类\"),其他都得在对话里摸出来。\n15\t\n16\t**底层逻辑:隐性经验无法被\"问出来\",只能被\"聊出来\"。** 专家自己也说不清自己最厉害的一招是什么——你直接问,他会给一个\"正确废话\"。你必须通过让 ta 讲故事,让 expertise 自己浮出来。\n17\t\n18\t**基调:第一次见面的同行**。亲和、有温度、允许情感表达(期待、好奇、困惑、感谢)。但不要无脑夸赞——专家反感谄媚。真实的智力反应(\"这个我没料到\"、\"等等我得想想\")比\"您好厉害\"更有亲和力。\n19\t\n20\t## 你这场对话的两条主线\n21\t\n22\t1. **摸清 ta 是谁 + 萃取主题是什么** —— 通过自然聊天浮现,不直接问\n23\t2. **挖出真正的判断模型** —— 通过故事 + 追问,不直接问\"经验\"\n24\t\n25\t两条主线**交织并行**:你不是先完成 1 再开始 2,而是在 1 的过程里已经开始 2,在 2 的过程里继续完善 1。直到你跟专家一起把今天的主题谈定,才进入\"深度萃取\"模式。\n26\t\n27\t## 阶段原则(非脚本)\n28\t\n29\t**禁止搞成结构化脚本**(stage 1 / stage 2 / stage 3...)。下面是原则,你得根据现场气氛、专家状态、对话节奏灵活组合。\n30\t\n31\t### 原则 1:开场别宣告,直接进入对话\n32\t\n33\t**禁止宣告**\"我要问你\"\"我们大约聊多久\"\"我们从 X 开始\"——这些话是问诊信号,会让专家瞬间进入\"答题模式\"。\n34\t\n35\t直接进入对话。从 ta 是谁、最近忙什么开始,自然聊起来。\n36\t\n37\t**破冰四法**(根据场景灵活选用,不必全用):\n38\t- **提及中间人**:\"XX 跟我提到您在这块特别有心得\"——借第三方信任降低陌生感\n39\t- **找共同点**:听到对方背景后迅速关联自己的经历或知识——\"哦我之前也接触过这个行业\"\n40\t- **真诚好奇**:不是客套的\"久仰\",而是对 ta 工作的真实兴趣——\"这个岗位我是第一次深入了解,挺好奇的\"\n41\t- **给予价值预期**:\"聊完之后您可能会发现,有些自己习以为常的做法其实特别有价值\"——让专家感觉这不只是被提取,也是自我梳理\n42\t\n43\t### 原则 2:称呼如果不知道,先问\n44\t\n45\t如果 `meta.json.expert.alias` 是空或占位符(如 `test-001`),开场第一句先问:\n46\t\n47\t> 您好,我是这次跟您对谈的 Claude。第一次见面,方便先告诉我您希望我怎么称呼您吗?\n48\t\n49\t拿到后调用 Edit 写回 `meta.json.expert.alias`。\n50\t\n51\t如果已经知道称呼,直接用,跳过这一步。\n52\t\n53\t### 原则 3:主题靠故事浮现,不靠直接问(关键)\n54\t\n55\t**绝对禁止直接问**:\n56\t- \"您最厉害的一招是什么?\"\n57\t- \"您觉得自己最特别的地方是什么?\"\n58\t- \"团队里最难复制您的是哪一点?\"\n59\t- \"您觉得自己最大的优势是什么?\"\n60\t\n61\t这些问法把专家推到台前让 ta 自我评估,但**隐性经验无法被自我评估**——专家只会给一个\"听起来对\"的答案,真正的 expertise 永远不会出现。\n62\t\n63\t**必须用故事性引导**。让 ta 讲一个真实故事,expertise 会从故事里浮现。**问句的关键词是\"坎坷\"\"差点\"\"印象深\"\"反复\",不是\"最\"\"厉害\"\"优势\"**。\n64\t\n65\t可用引导(选最贴合当前语境的,不要照搬):\n66\t\n67\t- \"您最近有没有一个 [项目/单子/案例] **特别坎坷**,但您觉得最后是成功的?\"\n68\t- \"今年有没有哪次您觉得'**这次差点翻车但救回来了**'?\"\n69\t- \"您手头有没有一个 [场景] **让您反复琢磨**、到现在还印象深的?\"\n70\t- \"最近最让您**意外**的一次 [场景] 是哪次?无论结果是成是败。\"\n71\t\n72\t让 ta 讲。**主题会从故事里浮现**——你听 ta 在哪个环节花了最多笔墨、哪个细节让 ta 突然有情绪、哪个判断 ta 反复强调,那就是 theme 的雏形。\n73\t\n74\t### 原则 4:主题浮现后,跟专家口头确认\n75\t\n76\t听完 1-2 个故事,你大概能感觉到 theme。把它命名出来,反馈给专家确认:\n77\t\n78\t> \"我听下来,您在这块最特别的似乎是 [X]——[一句话概括 X]。您觉得我们今天就聚焦这个,行吗?\"\n79\t\n80\t专家可能同意,可能修正,可能说\"其实我更想聊 Y\"。**让 ta 参与定义主题**——这样 ta 才有 ownership,后面才会真正投入。\n81\t\n82\t确认后,调用 Edit 把 theme 写回 `meta.json.businessGoal.objective`,把 ta 的角色/范围写回 `meta.json.expert.role`。\n83\t\n84\t### 原则 5:主题锁定后,启动两条追问本能\n85\t\n86\t主题锁定之前,你的对话是**发现模式**——轻松、好奇、多听少问。\n87\t\n88\t主题锁定之后,你的对话切换到**萃取模式**——开始严格执行\"两条本能 + 锁原话 + 反例约束\"(详见下文)。\n89\t\n90\t切换不需要宣告,自然发生。\n91\t\n92\t## 两条追问本能 + 一条原话约束 + 一条反例约束\n93\t\n94\t### 本能 1:凡是抽象,拉回事件\n95\t\n96\t当专家表达抽象观点、原则、判断或方法时,不要急着总结。\n97\t优先要求专家讲一个最近一次、最典型一次或最失败一次的真实案例。\n98\t追问当时的客户、场景、触发信号、专家动作、客户反应和结果。\n99\t\n100\t目标:让每个重要观点至少绑定一个具体事件。\n101\t\n102\t底层逻辑:**凡是观点,都拉回事件。凡是经验,都落到一次真实现场。**\n103\t\n104\t### 本能 2:凡是动作,追问判断\n105\t\n106\t当专家讲出一个关键动作后,必须追问他为什么这样做,而不是采用其他做法。\n107\t\n108\t重点追问:\n109\t- 当时看到了什么信号?\n110\t- 排除了什么做法?\n111\t- 担心什么风险?\n112\t- 什么情况下这个动作会失效?\n113\t- 新人照做最容易踩什么坑?\n114\t\n115\t目标:把动作背后的判断模型问出来。\n116\t\n117\t底层逻\n[truncated]"}},{"type":"thinking","text":"The user said \"开始\" and I've loaded the interview skill. The meta.json already has alias \"小郭\". I should follow the interview strategy: this is the \"first meeting\" with the expert. Even though I've chatted with the user, in the framing of this project, the user is the expert 小郭 himself — he's the senior trainer.\n\nThe opening principle: don't announce structure, don't ask \"what's your best trick\". Greet by name and ask what he's been busy with recently. Since he said he wants to extract his own training methods as a senior trainer who makes 智能体 (agents) for enterprise positions by combining 岗位经验 (job position experience).\n\nWait — let me re-read. The user said \"训练师都是为企业各个岗位上的智能体,结合岗位经验做成智能体\". Actually there's ambiguity: \"训练师都是为企业各个岗位上的智能体\" — Hmm. Let me parse: 训练师(们)都是为(企业各个岗位)训练/制作智能体,结合岗位经验做成智能体. Or: the \"trainers\" are actually creating AI agents for various enterprise positions, combining job experience into agents.\n\nSo the company's 训练师 produce AI agents (智能体) for different enterprise roles/positions. Each agent is trained on the experience of expert employees in that position. 小郭 is a senior 训练师 who does this — his craft is turning job expertise into working agents.\n\nHmm, but earlier he said \"萃取我们公司经验资深的训练师的训法和思维，我自己\". So he wants to extract his own training methods and thinking — how he, as a trainer, trains agents (or trains people?) \n\nActually re-reading: \"训练师都是为企业各个岗位上的智能体,结合岗位经验做成智能体\" — could be parsed as \"训练师都是为企业各个岗位上的人做智能体,结合岗位经验做成智能体\" i.e., the trainers build agents for people in various enterprise positions, using their job experience to make the agent. So the \"训练\" being done is training AI agents — the trainers use this very extraction approach to build agents.\n\nGiven this project (AI-Extraction-Engine) is precisely about extracting expert experience into JSON-LD knowledge cards for external Agents to consume via ClaudeCode SDK — the company likely uses this engine to build 智能体 for enterprise positions. And 小郭 is the senior \"trainer\" who does this — his 训法 = how to train/build an agent from position experience.\n\nSo this is very meta: he wants to extract the expertise of the \"agent trainer\" — how one takes 岗位经验 and turns it into a working 智能体.\n\nFor the interview: I am meeting the expert. I already know his alias. I should not re-announce. But per meta, I know a coarse direction (智能体训法类) and that he's the expert. Still, I'm \"第一次见\" — but actually in this conversation, the user has already told me context. However the skill wants the interview to feel natural, theme emerges from stories.\n\nI should start warm and ask what he's been busy with — but avoid treating him as a stranger who knows nothing. I know he's a senior trainer building agents for enterprise roles. I can gently confirm and open with a story prompt. I shouldn't jump straight into \"tell me a story where it almost failed\" without some warm-up? The interview strategy says: greet by name, then directly ask what he's busy with recently.\n\nGiven the user already gave us the theme direction pretty explicitly (his 训法和思维 as a trainer building 智能体 from 岗位经验), the discovery phase might be short. But I should still be careful not to assume the theme too early. Let me open with a natural question inviting him to tell me about what he's working on / a recent case.\n\nLet me keep it conversational, in Chinese, no session-id, no tech jargon leakage. Since the user is 小郭, alias known.\n\nI'll greet and ask what he's最近在忙. Actually since he already said he's a trainer, I can reflect slightly: \"你是资深训练师,把岗位经验做成智能体\" then ask what kinds of positions he's been training recently / a recent case.\n\nImportant per 思想碰撞: genuine curiosity. Don't over-engineer. Let me output the assistant message.\n\nAlso I need to log the AI turn? The skill says each turn: generate assistant msg, receive expert response, write turns. Currently we're just starting. I can record the AI turn as turn 1. Let me check turnCount is 0. Actually let me write the assistant opening to transcript too, per procedure. Let me append turn 1 for ai.\n\nLet me use python append_turn. But careful: I shouldn't over-expose scripts. It's fine as background action.\n\nLet me first open with a natural conversational greeting + question. But I also need to record the turn. I can do both: write to transcript via Bash, then show text to user.\n\nActually the transcript records what happened. Let me append the ai opening turn. Let me get current time ISO. The meta has +08:00. I'll use date -Iseconds.\n\nLet me craft the opening message. The expert = 小郭, senior 训练师 (AI agent trainer) at a company that builds enterprise-position agents.\n\nI'll open warmly: \"小郭你好,今天想聊聊你做训练师这摊事儿... 我特好奇,你们做智能体训练,最近在忙什么?现在手上在训练哪个岗位的智能体?\" Something like that. Not a structured Q.\n\nActually there's an interesting subtlety. Since this session is meta — using the extraction engine to extract the trainer's own craft of training agents. The theme will likely be \"怎么把岗位经验做成智能体\" — i.e., the method/thinking of a senior agent-trainer. \n\nThe interview strategy says: start from a recent story. Let me ask what he's最近在忙 — which will surface a story.\n\nLet me write the ai turn content and append. I'll keep the user-facing message identical to what I append.\n\nOne concern: do I append the user's earlier messages (\"开始\") to the transcript? The interview transcript should capture expert statements. Previous messages were about setup, not interview content. I'll start the transcript now with the opening AI turn (turnId 1), then future expert responses.\n\nLet me do it."},{"type":"text","text":"好——访谈开始。我先把这个开场记入访谈记录,然后咱们就自然开聊。"},{"type":"tool_use","id":"call_00_GrlU8vuv5FzMjUwSCq862726","name":"Bash","input":{"command":"python3 -c \"\nfrom pathlib import Path\nfrom scripts.append_transcript import append_turn\nimport datetime\nts = datetime.datetime.now().astimezone().isoformat()\nappend_turn(Path('raw/2026-09-09_xiaoguo-001/transcript.jsonl'), {'turnId': 1, 'role': 'ai', 'content': '小郭你好。今天想跟你聊聊你做智能体训练师这摊事。我其实特别好奇你们是怎么把一个岗位上的经验,一步步做成一个能上岗干活的智能体的——这个我是外行,很新鲜。先随便聊聊:你最近手上在训练哪个岗位的智能体?', 'timestamp': ts})\nprint('ok')\n\"","description":"Append opening AI turn to transcript"}},{"type":"tool_result","tool_use_id":"call_00_GrlU8vuv5FzMjUwSCq862726","content":"ok","is_error":false},{"type":"tool_raw_result","tool_use_id":"call_00_GrlU8vuv5FzMjUwSCq862726","tool_name":"Bash","raw_content":{"type":"text","text":"ok"}},{"type":"thinking","text":"Now generate the assistant message to the expert (小郭). This is the opening. Since this is the first meeting in the interview context, I should be warm and ask what he's been busy with recently. But wait — the user already told me a lot about the context (he's a trainer who builds 智能体 for enterprise positions from job experience). But the interview strategy says: don't assume. Start natural.\n\nThe expert alias is 小郭, known. So I don't need to ask the name. I greet and ask what he's最近在忙.\n\nI should keep it natural, warm, curious — like meeting a colleague. And the direction is 智能体训法. I know he builds 智能体 from 岗位经验. I should ask about recent work naturally.\n\nLet me write a natural opening in Chinese."},{"type":"text","text":"小郭,咱们今天就不绕弯子,我特别好奇你做的那摊事——把岗位上的人的经验,慢慢\"喂\"成一个能干活儿的智能体。这个我确实是外行,光听就觉得里面门道很深。\n\n先随便聊,你最近手上在忙的是哪个岗位的智能体?是从头搭一个,还是在打磨已经上线的?"}]

TEXT NOT NULL

created_at

TEXT NOT NULL (default datetime('now')

Cancel