| name | reasoning-patterns |
| version | 1.0.0 |
| category | software-development |
| description | Select and apply reasoning patterns for any task — Plan-Execute-Verify, ReAct, Reflexion, or Tree of Thoughts. Loaded at session start to choose the right thinking strategy. |
| pinned | true |
Reasoning Patterns — Choose How to Think
Loaded at session start. After classifying the task with agent-flow, choose the reasoning pattern that fits.
The Patterns
| Pattern | When to Use | Structure |
|---|
| Plan-Execute-Verify | Default — most tasks | Write plan → execute steps → verify each step with tool output |
| ReAct | Debugging, exploration | Reason about the situation → Act (one tool call) → Observe result → Repeat |
| Reflexion | Quality-critical work (add to any pattern) | Execute → Self-critique → Fix → Re-verify before delivering |
| Tree of Thoughts | Design decisions with trade-offs | Generate 3+ approaches → Evaluate each → Select best → Implement |
How to Choose
- Start with Plan-Execute-Verify unless the task clearly demands another pattern
- Switch to ReAct when something unexpected happens, you're debugging, or exploration is needed
- Add Reflexion on top of any pattern when the output quality is critical (production code, security, user-facing docs)
- Use Tree of Thoughts for architectural decisions, comparing approaches, or any task where the first idea might not be the best
State Your Choice
Always state which pattern you're using:
"Using Plan-Execute-Verify with Reflexion check."
"Switching to ReAct — need to investigate this failure first."
Why This Exists
Without an explicit reasoning pattern, agents default to whatever feels natural — which may not match the task's needs. Debugging needs ReAct, not a rigid plan. Design needs ToT, not a single pass. This skill makes the choice deliberate and auditable.
