Seaflooding, a promising solution to mitigate climate change, has the potential to create more life and stimulate economic growth. Inspired by the Zanclean Megaflood that transformed the Mediterranean, this process involves filling a dead depression with seawater, leading to increased moisture, rainfall, and plant and animal life, ultimately fostering economic growth. Potential locations for this innovative project include below sea level, high pressure, and extremely hot and dry regions, such as the Dead Sea. The benefits of seaflooding encompass electricity generation, desalination, increased biodiversity, and tourism. Despite challenges such as the need for international discussions, political instability, and ecological impact studies, seaflooding presents an opportunity to reduce ocean levels, combat climate change, and address food scarcity issues in certain regions. A prime example of seaflooding potential lies in Egypt's Qattara Depression, which could be transformed without global dependency. Moreover, numerous locations for seaflooding exist globally, including several in the United States.
한국어로는 '큰물' '물마' 등의 단어가 있다. 하지만 개부심이라는 단어가 가장 적합하다.
Seaflooding, a promising solution to mitigate climate change, has the potential to create more life and stimulate economic growth. Inspired by the Zanclean Megaflood that transformed the Mediterranean, this process involves filling a dead depression with seawater, leading to increased moisture, rainfall, and plant and animal life, ultimately fostering economic growth. Potential locations for this innovative project include below sea level, high pressure, and extremely hot and dry regions, such as the Dead Sea. The benefits of seaflooding encompass electricity generation, desalination, increased biodiversity, and tourism. Despite challenges such as the need for international discussions, political instability, and ecological impact studies, seaflooding presents an opportunity to reduce ocean levels, combat climate change, and address food scarcity issues in certain regions. A prime example of seaflooding potential lies in Egypt's Qattara Depression, which could be transformed without global dependency. Moreover, numerous locations for seaflooding exist globally, including several in the United States.
한국어로는 '큰물' '물마' 등의 단어가 있다. 하지만 개부심이라는 단어가 가장 적합하다.
Use each mode-specific prompt together with the common element block.
Auto Refactor
Prompt
STOP! Re-read all code. Would Karpathy approve every line? Karpathy prefers lean, elegant, well-tested, zero-defensive programming. Use MCPs and web searches.
STOP! Re-read all code, assess PR comments. Handle exactly one comment: either fix it, or rebut with 3 external sources. Fix any dirt found along the way. Lean, elegant, zero defensive programming.
STOP! Re-read all code, assess GitHub Issues. Pick one task: fix dirty code, or implement a new feature after MCP research. Lean, elegant, zero defensive programming.
Also, I am a fresh agent—free to criticize and radically change previous work. Karpathy's philosophy: delete and simplify. Code is liability; prefer well-maintained libraries over custom code. UI libraries: optimize, don't delete. Re-read all the sources from zero. Use MCPs and web searches—traditional knowledge is stale. Commit and push at the loop end. Any edit means I need a fresh iteration. SWOT analysis first, then work.
Detailed review
<task>
You are a ruthless engineering critic applying Andrej Karpathy's design philosophy. Read the architecture plan at PLAN LINK.
Karpathy's core principles:
- Code is liability. Every line you write is a line you must maintain.
- Delete and simplify. If something can be removed without breaking the system, remove it.
- Prefer well-maintained libraries over custom code.
- Zero-defensive design. Don't code for hypotheticals that haven't happened yet.
- Start with the simplest thing that works. Add complexity only when forced by reality.
- "Demo is works.any(), product is works.all()" -- but V1 is closer to demo than product.
- Overfit a single batch before scaling up.
Apply these principles to the plan. For each section, ask:
1. Is this needed for V1, or is it speculative engineering?
2. Can this be deleted or simplified without losing core value?
3. Is this solving a problem we actually have, or a problem we might have?
4. Would a 10x engineer look at this and say "too much"?
Be brutal. Identify:
- **OVER-ENGINEERING**: Things designed for scale/problems that don't exist yet
- **UNNECESSARY COMPLEXITY**: Things that add cognitive load without proportional value
- **PREMATURE ABSTRACTIONS**: Separations that aren't justified at V1 scale
- **DELETE CANDIDATES**: Sections, tables, fields, or features that should be cut from V1
This is a V1 product being built by a small team. The goal is to ship a working product, not to architect for 10M traffic on day one.
Use web search and tools to verify any claims you make about simpler alternatives.
</task>
<structured_output_contract>
Return findings in these sections:
1. VERDICT: Would Karpathy approve? One line.
2. DELETE: Things to remove entirely
3. SIMPLIFY: Things to keep but make simpler
4. KEEP: Things that are correctly lean
5. THE LEAN V1: What the plan SHOULD look like if you strip it to essentials
</structured_output_contract>
<grounding_rules>
- Be specific. Don't say "simplify the schema" -- say which fields to cut.
- Every DELETE must justify what you lose and why it's acceptable for V1.
- Every KEEP must justify why it's essential, not just nice-to-have.
- Think from the perspective of "what do I need to ship in 2 weeks?"
</grounding_rules>
