WFGY method

WFGY (Wan Fa Gui Yi, "all methods return to one") is a reasoning-drift-control technique from onestardao/WFGY. This skill ports its portable behavioral core to a text-generating agent's own multi-step work. Provenance and the dropped list: references/honesty-and-provenance.md. Technical basis of each claim: references/wfgy-core-mechanism.md.

On deltaS: deltaS = 1 - cos(I, G) (I = current state, G = goal/anchor). Absent a real embedding call, any numeric deltaS you produce is your own qualitative estimate, not a measurement. Use the label ("deltaS is climbing," "deltaS looks high here") as shorthand for "this step is drifting from the stated goal"; never present a specific decimal as computed.The current build serves no embedding verb, so every deltaS here is your own estimate. Say so explicitly ("deltaS looks high here, my own estimate, no embedding measured").

G - the anchor (BBMC pattern: compare state against goal)

At the start of any task this skill applies to, write one sentence stating the actual goal (G) -- not the first sub-task, the actual end state the user wants. Re-read it before any step that could plausibly have drifted: a long tool-call chain, a pivot in approach, a request to "also" do something adjacent.

• Stated G in one sentence before starting.
• Before each major step, ask: does what I'm about to do still serve G, or have I started solving a different, adjacent problem?
• If drift is real (not just "this step looks different from the last one" -- actual scope change, contradicted earlier decision, answering a different question than asked), say so explicitly and re-anchor before continuing.

Gotcha: the temptation is to silently keep going once you notice drift, because stopping to say "wait, I've drifted" feels like an interruption. Don't suppress it -- a silently-corrected drift is invisible to the user and looks like it never happened; a stated one is a real signal they can act on.

BBPF pattern - consider more than one path before committing

For ambiguous or high-stakes decisions only: name at least two real candidate approaches, commit to the one that most clearly and verifiably advances G, and surface the choice when no candidate is clearly better. Checklist and rationale: references/bbpf-candidate-paths.md.