为什么你总是慢半拍？（你为何总慢一步？）

Clarifying responses for tool use

I think we could ask a clarifying question to grasp what they mean by "slow half-beat," like if they’re referring to measured delays or tool runs. I’m considering adjusting our verbosity too. I shouldn't mention the internal details like "GPT-5," just keeping it assistant-focused. Light formatting is fine, maybe using bullets for suggestions, like being explicit if output isn’t needed or providing context for paths. Finally, I’d recommend easing approvals since they might cause delays.Offering quick mode options

I could suggest switching to "quick mode" to provide shorter answers by skipping extra checks. It's best not to ask too many questions, ideally just one at the end: “Do you want fast mode?” I won't run any shell commands since they're not needed. I’ll outline reasons for latency like model overhead, sandbox approvals, and safety checks. I can keep answers terse, limit searches, and suggest users share file paths or pre-authorize commands for smoother interactions.Simplifying planning for tasks

The instructions mention using the Plan tool, but I think I could suggest, "I’ll skip planning for simple tasks unless asked." That keeps things crisp and straightforward. It shows I'm being efficient while still providing the user with flexibility. This way, I can focus more on delivering timely answers instead of getting caught up in unnecessary planning for tasks that can be handled more directly.

主要是这些原因会让回复显得“慢半拍”：

• 工具/命令开销：为确保正确性，我常用搜索、解析、运行测试，这些都要花时间。
• 沙箱与审批：受限的文件/网络权限或需你批准的步骤会阻塞。
• 大上下文处理：长对话或大仓库会增加推理与检索时间。
• 谨慎策略：默认更保守（验证、解释、边界检查），牺牲一点速度换稳定性。

我这边可以做的加速：

• 默认更简短；非必要不跑命令、不做计划；先给结论再补要点。
• 搜索/分析只在你指定的路径或文件内进行。
• 批量回答/修改，减少往返。

你可以帮忙的：

• 精确给出文件路径、代码片段和期望输出，标注要点与非目标。
• 明确说“只要结论/不要解释”“不要跑任何命令/测试”。
• 预先授权常见操作（如 rg 搜索、运行本地测试）或说明不可用。
• 如果仓库很大，提供相关子目录，或粘贴关键代码段。

要不要切到“快模式”？特点：

• 极简回答；不调用外部工具，除非你点名。
• 不做详细验证；只在发现明显风险时提醒。 回复“快模式”即可切换，或告诉我你想保留的检查项。