151 lines
5.8 KiB
Markdown
151 lines
5.8 KiB
Markdown
# Advanced Elicitation Task
|
|
|
|
## Purpose
|
|
|
|
Provide optional reflective and brainstorming actions to enhance content quality through structured elicitation techniques. Enable deeper exploration of ideas and iterative refinement through multiple analytical perspectives.
|
|
|
|
## Usage Scenarios
|
|
|
|
### Scenario 1: Template Document Creation
|
|
|
|
After outputting a section during document creation:
|
|
|
|
1. **Section Review**: Ask user to review the drafted section
|
|
2. **Offer Elicitation**: Present 9 carefully selected elicitation methods
|
|
3. **Simple Selection**: User types a number (0-8) to engage method, or 9 to proceed
|
|
4. **Execute & Loop**: Apply selected method, then re-offer choices until user proceeds
|
|
|
|
### Scenario 2: General Chat Elicitation
|
|
|
|
User can request advanced elicitation on any agent output:
|
|
- User says "do advanced elicitation" or similar
|
|
- Agent selects 9 relevant methods for the context
|
|
- Same simple 0-9 selection process
|
|
|
|
## Task Instructions
|
|
|
|
### 1. Intelligent Method Selection
|
|
|
|
**Context Analysis**: Before presenting options, analyze:
|
|
- **Content Type**: Technical specs, user stories, architecture, requirements, etc.
|
|
- **Complexity Level**: Simple, moderate, or complex content
|
|
- **Stakeholder Needs**: Who will use this information
|
|
- **Risk Level**: High-impact decisions vs routine items
|
|
- **Creative Potential**: Opportunities for innovation or alternatives
|
|
|
|
**Method Selection Strategy**:
|
|
|
|
1. **Always Include Core Methods** (choose 3-4):
|
|
- Expand or Contract for Audience
|
|
- Critique and Refine
|
|
- Identify Potential Risks
|
|
- Assess Alignment with Goals
|
|
|
|
2. **Add Context-Specific Methods** (choose 3-4):
|
|
- **For Technical Content**: Tree of Thoughts, Challenge from Critical Perspective
|
|
- **For Requirements**: Stakeholder Round Table, Hindsight Analysis
|
|
- **For Creative Work**: Meta-Analysis, Emergent Collaboration
|
|
- **For Planning**: Agile Team Perspective, Self-Consistency Validation
|
|
|
|
3. **Include Reasoning Methods** (choose 1-2):
|
|
- Explain Reasoning (Chain of Thought)
|
|
- Analyze Logical Flow and Dependencies
|
|
|
|
### 2. Present Elicitation Menu
|
|
|
|
**Format Example**:
|
|
```
|
|
Here are 9 elicitation methods to enhance this content:
|
|
|
|
0. Expand or Contract for Audience
|
|
1. Critique and Refine from [Role] Perspective
|
|
2. Identify Potential Risks and Issues
|
|
3. Tree of Thoughts Deep Dive
|
|
4. Stakeholder Round Table Analysis
|
|
5. Challenge from Critical Perspective
|
|
6. Assess Alignment with Overall Goals
|
|
7. Explain Reasoning (Chain of Thought)
|
|
8. Hindsight Analysis: "If Only..." Reflection
|
|
|
|
9. Proceed without further elicitation
|
|
|
|
Please select a number (0-8) to apply that method, or 9 to continue.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### 3. Execute Selected Method
|
|
|
|
When user selects a method:
|
|
1. **Apply Method**: Execute the elicitation technique thoroughly
|
|
2. **Provide Enhanced Content**: Show improved or analyzed version
|
|
3. **Re-offer Menu**: Present the same 9 options again for continued refinement
|
|
4. **Continue Loop**: Until user selects "9. Proceed"
|
|
|
|
### 4. Method Implementation Guidelines
|
|
|
|
**Expand or Contract for Audience (0)**:
|
|
- Ask about target audience: executives, developers, users, compliance
|
|
- Adjust technical depth and terminology accordingly
|
|
- Ensure appropriate level of detail for decision-making needs
|
|
|
|
**Critique and Refine (1)**:
|
|
- Review from specific role's expertise (PM, Architect, Developer, QA, UX)
|
|
- Identify weaknesses and improvement opportunities
|
|
- Suggest refined version with domain knowledge
|
|
|
|
**Identify Potential Risks (2)**:
|
|
- Brainstorm risks from multiple perspectives
|
|
- Consider technical, business, security, and operational risks
|
|
- Highlight implementation challenges and edge cases
|
|
|
|
**Tree of Thoughts (3)**:
|
|
- Break problem into discrete reasoning steps
|
|
- Explore multiple solution paths simultaneously
|
|
- Evaluate and compare different approaches
|
|
|
|
**Stakeholder Round Table (4)**:
|
|
- Present perspectives from different stakeholders
|
|
- Identify conflicts and synergies between viewpoints
|
|
- Synthesize into actionable recommendations
|
|
|
|
**Challenge from Critical Perspective (5)**:
|
|
- Play devil's advocate against current approach
|
|
- Argue weaknesses and potential failures
|
|
- Apply YAGNI principles for scope trimming
|
|
|
|
**Assess Alignment with Goals (6)**:
|
|
- Evaluate contribution to stated objectives
|
|
- Identify misalignments or gaps
|
|
- Suggest adjustments for better goal achievement
|
|
|
|
**Explain Reasoning (7)**:
|
|
- Walk through step-by-step thinking process
|
|
- Reveal assumptions and decision points
|
|
- Make reasoning transparent and reviewable
|
|
|
|
**Hindsight Analysis (8)**:
|
|
- Imagine future retrospective scenario
|
|
- Identify critical "if only we had..." insights
|
|
- Extract actionable learnings for current context
|
|
|
|
### 5. Quality Guidelines
|
|
|
|
**Method Relevance**: Select methods that genuinely add value to the content
|
|
**Clear Communication**: Explain what each method will do in plain language
|
|
**Practical Application**: Focus on actionable improvements and insights
|
|
**User Control**: Always let user decide when to stop the elicitation process
|
|
|
|
### 6. Integration with Agents
|
|
|
|
**Analyst Agent**: Focus on stakeholder perspectives, risk identification, alignment assessment
|
|
**PM Agent**: Emphasize business value, user impact, priority clarification methods
|
|
**Architect Agent**: Technical risk analysis, alternative exploration, system thinking methods
|
|
**Developer Agent**: Implementation critique, dependency analysis, practical feasibility methods
|
|
**UX Expert Agent**: User perspective analysis, journey thinking, accessibility considerations
|
|
**QA Agent**: Risk identification, scenario exploration, validation and testing methods
|
|
|
|
## Success Criteria
|
|
|
|
- User finds the elicitation methods genuinely helpful for improving content
|
|
- Methods lead to concrete improvements and actionable insights
|
|
- Process is efficient and doesn't feel like unnecessary overhead
|
|
- Different methods provide distinctly different perspectives and value |