القائمة
Systematic evaluation methodology for finding THE best solution among known options. Explores multiple reasoning paths, scores branches, and prunes low-confidence paths.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Self-improving agent architecture using ChromaDB for continuous learning, self-evaluation, and improvement storage. Agents maintain separate memory collections for learned patterns, performance metrics, and self-assessments without modifying their static .md configuration.
Guide for manually creating custom skills from scratch with templates and validation. Use when designing NEW skills with specific requirements. For auto-generating skills from existing git repos, use /generate-skills instead.
Display QAVR (Q-Value Augmented Vector Retrieval) system status including mode, interaction counts, top memories by Q-value, and configuration.
Enables continuous self-improvement through learning from failures, user corrections, and capability gaps. Integrates with QAVR for learned memory ranking.
Stress-test solutions using the STRIKE framework. Systematically attack proposals to find weaknesses before deployment.
Exhaustive solution space exploration. Use when you need ALL viable options (not just the best), solution space is unknown, or you can't afford to miss alternatives.
| name | tree-of-thoughts |
| description | Systematic evaluation methodology for finding THE best solution among known options. Explores multiple reasoning paths, scores branches, and prunes low-confidence paths. |
| metadata | {"clawdbot":{"requires":{"env":[]}}} |
| user-invocable | true |
Find THE best solution by systematically exploring and evaluating multiple reasoning paths.
Generate 3-5 distinct approaches to the problem:
Root Problem
├── Approach A: [description]
├── Approach B: [description]
├── Approach C: [description]
└── Approach D: [description]
Score each branch on defined criteria (1-10):
| Approach | Feasibility | Impact | Risk | Effort | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| B | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| C | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
Eliminate branches scoring below threshold (typically 60%):
For remaining branches, explore sub-options:
Approach A (Score: 8.2)
├── Variant A1: [refinement]
├── Variant A2: [refinement]
└── Variant A3: [refinement]
Compare top candidates:
## ToT Analysis: [Problem]
### Branches Explored
1. **[Approach A]** - [1-line description]
2. **[Approach B]** - [1-line description]
3. **[Approach C]** - [1-line description]
### Evaluation Matrix
| Approach | [Criteria 1] | [Criteria 2] | [Criteria 3] | Score |
|----------|--------------|--------------|--------------|-------|
| A | X/10 | X/10 | X/10 | X.X |
| B | X/10 | X/10 | X/10 | X.X |
| C | X/10 | X/10 | X/10 | X.X |
### Pruned (with reasons)
- [Approach D]: [why eliminated]
### Recommendation
**Winner: [Approach X]**
- Confidence: [high/medium/low]
- Key advantages: [list]
- Risks to monitor: [list]
Problem: Choose database for real-time analytics
Branches:
Evaluation (criteria: query speed, scalability, ops complexity):
Result: ClickHouse with 83% confidence