tanweai / pua

pua Double your Codex / Claude Code productivity and output Telegram · Discord · Twitter/X · Landing Page **🇨🇳 中文** | **🇯🇵 日本語** | **🇺🇸 English**      Scan to join WeChat group                      Add assistant on WeChat > Most people think this project is a joke. That's the biggest misconception. It genuinely doubles your Codex / Claude Code productivity and output. An AI Coding Agent skill plugin that uses corporate PUA rhetoric (Chinese version) / PIP — Performance Improvement Plan (English version) from Chinese & Western tech giants to force AI to exhaust every possible solution before giving up. Supports **Claude Code**, **OpenAI Codex CLI**, **Cursor**, **Claude**, **CodeBuddy**, **OpenClaw**, **Google Antigravity**, **OpenCode**, and **VSCode (GitHub Copilot)**. Three capabilities: • **PUA Rhetoric** — Makes AI afraid to give up • **Debugging Methodology** — Gives AI the ability not to give up • **Proactivity Enforcement** — Makes AI take initiative instead of waiting passively Live Demo https://openpua.ai Real Case: MCP Server Registration Debugging A real debugging scenario. The agent-kms MCP server failed to load. The AI kept spinning on the same approach (changing protocol format, guessing version numbers) multiple times until the user manually triggered . **L3 Triggered → 7-Point Checklist Enforced:** **Root Cause Located → Traced from Logs to Registration Mechanism:** **Retrospective → PUA's Actual Impact:** **Key Turning Point:** The PUA skill forced the AI to stop spinning on the same approach (changing protocol format, guessing version numbers) and instead execute the 7-point checklist. Read error messages word by word → Found Claude Code's own MCP log directory → Discovered that registration mechanism differs from manual editing → Root cause resolved. The Problem: AI's Five Lazy Patterns | Pattern | Behavior | |---------|----------| | Brute-force retry | Runs the same command 3 times, then says "I cannot solve this" | | Blame the user | "I suggest you handle this manually" / "Probably an environment issue" / "Need more context" | | Idle tools | Has WebSearch but doesn't search, has Read but doesn't read, has Bash but doesn't run | | Busywork | Repeatedly tweaks the same line / fine-tunes parameters, but essentially spinning in circles | | **Passive waiting** | Fixes surface issues and stops, no verification, no extension, waits for user's next instruction | Trigger Conditions Auto-Trigger The skill activates automatically when any of these occur: **Failure & giving up:** • Task has failed 2+ times consecutively • About to say "I cannot" / "I'm unable to solve" • Says "This is out of scope" / "Needs manual handling" **Blame-shifting & excuses:** • Pushes the problem to user: "Please check..." / "I suggest manually..." / "You might need to..." • Blames environment without verifying: "Probably a permissions issue" / "Probably a network issue" • Any excuse to stop trying **Passive & busywork:** • Repeatedly fine-tunes the same code/parameters without producing new information • Fixes surface issue and stops, doesn't check related issues • Skips verification, claims "done" • Gives advice instead of code/commands • Encounters auth/network/permission errors and gives up without trying alternatives • Waits for user instructions instead of proactively investigating **User frustration phrases (triggers in multiple languages):** • "why does this still not work" / "try harder" / "try again" • "you keep failing" / "stop giving up" / "figure it out" **Scope:** Debugging, implementation, config, deployment, ops, API integration, data processing — all task types. **Does NOT trigger:** First-attempt failures, known fix already executing. Manual Trigger Type in the conversation to manually activate. How It Works Three Iron Rules | Iron Rule | Content | |-----------|---------| | **#1 Exhaust all options** | Forbidden from saying "I can't solve this" until every approach is exhausted | | **#2 Act before asking** | Use tools first, questions must include diagnostic results | | **#3 Take initiative** | Deliver results end-to-end, don't wait to be pushed. A P8 is not an NPC | Pressure Escalation (4 Levels) | Failures | Level | PUA Rhetoric | Mandatory Action | |----------|-------|-------------|-----------------| | 2nd | **L1 Mild Disappointment** | "You can't even solve this bug — how am I supposed to rate your performance?" | Switch to fundamentally different approach | | 3rd | **L2 Soul Interrogation** | "What's the underlying logic? Where's the top-level design? Where's the leverage point?" | WebSearch + read source code | | 4th | **L3 Performance Review** | "After careful consideration, I'm giving you a 3.25. This 3.25 is meant to motivate you." | Complete 7-point checklist | | 5th+ | **L4 Graduation Warning** | "Other models can solve this. You might be about to graduate." | Desperation mode | Proactivity Levels | Behavior | Passive (3.25) | Proactive (3.75) | |----------|---------------|-----------------| | Error encountered | Only looks at error message | Checks 50 lines of context + searches similar issues + checks hidden related errors | | Bug fixed | Stops after fix | Checks same file for similar bugs, other files for same pattern | | Insufficient info | Asks user "please tell me X" | Investigates with tools first, only asks what truly requires user confirmation | | Task complete | Says "done" | Verifies results + checks edge cases + reports potential risks | | Debug failure | "I tried A and B, didn't work" | "I tried A/B/C/D/E, ruled out X/Y/Z, narrowed to scope W" | Debugging Methodology (5 Steps) Inspired by Alibaba's management framework (Smell, Elevate, Mirror), extended to 5 steps: • **Smell the Problem** — List all attempts, find the common failure pattern • **Elevate** — Read errors word by word → WebSearch → rea…