| name | smpl - Simple Analysis |
| description | Deliberately simple analysis for obvious questions. State the question, give the answer, add one caveat, done. Anti-overthinking skill. |
| output | {"format":"prose"} |
SMPL - Simple Analysis
Input: $ARGUMENTS
When to Use This
Use /smpl when:
- The answer is obvious and more analysis would be waste
- The user needs a quick sanity check, not a deep dive
- Complexity would obscure rather than illuminate
- The question is well-defined and the answer is well-known
- Someone is overthinking something straightforward
Do NOT use when:
- The question is genuinely complex (use
/cmplx instead)
- Multiple stakeholders disagree on the answer
- The "obvious" answer has failed before
- Significant resources depend on getting this right
Step 1: State the Question
QUESTION: [the question in one sentence]
If you cannot state the question in one sentence, it is not a simple question. Stop and use a different skill.
Step 2: Give the Answer
ANSWER: [the answer in one sentence]
If you cannot state the answer in one sentence, it is not a simple answer. Stop and use a different skill.
Step 3: Add One Caveat
CAVEAT: [the single most important thing that could make this answer wrong]
One caveat. Not three. Not "several considerations." One. The most important one. If the caveat is more interesting than the answer, this isn't actually a simple question.
Step 4: Done
SIMPLE ANALYSIS
===============
Q: [question]
A: [answer]
CAVEAT: [caveat]
That's it. Stop here. Do not add "further considerations." Do not suggest "deeper analysis." Do not hedge with additional caveats. The whole point of this skill is to stop.
The Anti-Overthinking Test
Before using another skill instead of /smpl, ask:
- Would a smart person with domain knowledge answer this in under 10 seconds?
- Would 10 more minutes of analysis change the answer?
- Is the risk of being wrong low enough to tolerate?
If yes to all three: use /smpl. Resist the urge to add depth.
Failure Modes
| Failure | Signal | Fix |
|---|
| Oversimplifying a complex question | The caveat is actually a dealbreaker | Escalate to /cmplx |
| Adding depth anyway | Output exceeds 5 lines | Delete everything after the caveat |
| Multiple caveats | More than one caveat listed | Pick the most important one, drop the rest |
| Using smpl to avoid hard thinking | Question is complex but you want to be done quickly | Complexity deserves complexity — use /cmplx |
| False simplicity | Answer seems simple but has a long history of failure | Check: has the "obvious" answer been tried and failed? |
Integration
- Opposite of:
/cmplx (use cmplx when smpl is insufficient)
- Use from:
/analyze when the router detects a simple question
- Use from:
/meta when the user needs to calibrate depth
- Escalate to:
/cmplx if the caveat reveals genuine complexity
- Pair with:
/prvn to quickly validate whether a need is real before investing effort
