计划执行与检查节点
executing-plans
按既定实施计划完成工作,保持过程检查和反馈。
raise-vs-jump【效率与协作】Model staying for annual raises vs job-hopping for bigger bumps — cumulative earnings trajectories, the crossover year, and the costs the salary math hides (vesting resets, promotion paths, search risk). Use when asked should I switch jobs for more money, is job hopping worth it, model my salary if I stay vs leave, or raise versus new offer. Produces…
独立 GitHub 快照 · 自动分类 · 以原作者文档为准
"Job hoppers earn more" is true on salary and incomplete on everything else: equity that vests on a cliff you keep resetting, the promotion you were two quarters from, the months of search time, the reputation cost of a short-stint résumé. This skill runs the salary math properly — trajectories, not single offers — and then insists on the checklist of what the salary math can't see, because that checklist decides more of these choices than the compounding does.
Ask for these if not provided:
python3 scripts/raise_vs_jump.py --salary 120000
python3 scripts/raise_vs_jump.py --salary 120000 --stay-raise 3.5 --jump-bump 18 --jump-every 3 --json
Deterministic. Models salary only — the script prints its own not-modeled list, and the skill's job is to make that list concrete for the user.
--jump-year-raise 2 default, and it's why the crossover is later than the first bump suggests[Script output: year-by-year table, crossover year, gaps at horizon]
[Two sentences: the size of the pure-salary edge and how sensitive it is to the bump/raise assumptions.]
| Item | This user | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| Unvested equity walked away from | [$ and schedule] | [often decisive] |
| Promotion proximity on the stay path | [named role/timeline or "vague"] | |
| Search risk | [in-demand? runway?] | |
| Résumé pattern | [tenure history] |
[One paragraph: what the numbers plus the checklist actually suggest — a recommendation with its reasoning, not a dodge.]
Educational model, not financial or career advice — the checklist items are prompts for the user's judgment, not scores from the model.