Guides the design of a skill that works independently with no dependencies on other skills. Ensures the skill is self-contained, well-scoped, and useful in isolation.
Skills in this repository
benjam3n/reasoningtool - Page 16
SkillsMP has collected 655 skills from benjam3n/reasoningtool. Open a skill to review its source and details.
benjam3n/reasoningtoolShowing 40 of 655 collected skills.
For when you have a goal but genuinely don't know where to begin. Find the zero-dependency starting point and take it.
Expand implications of a statement so the hidden conclusions are explicit, ordered by depth, and flagged by impact and testability.
Real problems exist in complex systems with many interacting parts. Comprehensive system modeling ontology.
Analyze any system by mapping components, connections, feedback loops, leverage points, and emergent behaviors.
Analyze feedback loops, emergent behavior, system dynamics, stocks and flows, and leverage points. See the system, not just the parts.
Identify unresolved decisions in any plan, document, or conversation, and convert each into an explicit determination question with type, owner, deadline, and cost of remaining unresolved.
Orderings driven by temporal constraints, deadlines, and timing requirements.
Explains any concept so that someone can actually understand it. Uses the Feynman technique — simple words, clear structure, no hiding behind jargon.
Sub-orchestrator for domain-specific questions. Routes to specialized skills based on domain and task type.
Design and run effective group sessions that produce clear outcomes, manage group dynamics, and keep participants engaged.
Meta-skill for choosing the right thinking approach. Identifies what type of thinking is needed, selects the appropriate framework, applies it, and evaluates output quality.
Assess structural integrity of a collection, system, or toolkit. Finds broken references, orphans, circular dependencies, and naming inconsistencies.
Analyzes something from the team perspective. Identifies composition, roles, communication patterns, coordination costs, and collaboration synergies.
Specific, tested tactics for navigating the most common value tensions and conflicts.
Generate valid execution sequences from dependencies. Respects hard constraints, optimizes for priorities, and identifies parallel execution opportunities.
Sequence unresolved TBDs by dependency and impact for operational resolution, identifying parallel tracks, blockers, and the critical resolution path.
Arguments form dependency graphs. When any assumption's truth value changes, propagate through all dependent conclusions.
Registry for domain templates. Store, retrieve, search, and manage domain-specific configurations.
Rapidly sorts multiple problems, tasks, or issues by urgency and importance into a priority matrix with a ranked action list.
Assess trust dynamics — who trusts whom, on what dimensions (competence, integrity, benevolence), what would build or erode trust, and how trust asymmetries create organizational dysfunction.
Universalize - Extract the complete space of assumptions, dimensions, and alternatives from any claim. Map before you judge. Track every finding.
UAUA Combined Exploration - Universalize, ARAW, loop, synthesize. Map possibilities with numbered findings, test rigorously with numbered claims, compile a complete registry, derive synthesis only from the registry.
Given a skill or method, map its best-fit use cases, failure conditions, limits, and alternative skills with explicit switch conditions.
The comprehensive question framework v5 — adds operational, meta-cognitive, and quality categories. Consolidated from ugav2-v5.
Goal analysis focused on generating fact-yielding questions. Each question must produce a testable fact, not a vague reflection. Consolidated into /uga but usable standalone for question-focused goal analysis.
Goal analysis with fully decomposed sub-procedures. Every analysis step is broken into atomic operations that can be followed mechanically. Consolidated into /uga but usable standalone for procedural goal decomposition.
Goal analysis emphasizing leverage identification and stakeholder communication. Finds where small effort produces big results and maps who needs to know what. Consolidated into /uga but usable standalone.
Goal analysis adding operational load assessment, meta-cognitive sustainability, and quality validation categories. Catches goals that are analytically sound but operationally unsustainable. Consolidated into /uga but usable standalone.
Analyzes an under-served area to determine what it needs. Assesses current coverage, identifies gaps relative to demand, and recommends build order.
Diagnose why you're blocked and get concrete unblocking actions based on the type of block: information gap, decision paralysis, emotional block, skill gap, or wrong approach.
For mild uncertainty — you have a direction but aren't confident. A decision tree to move from hesitation to action or justified pause.
Tests whether a claim, principle, or method works across all contexts. Finds the true scope of applicability and states boundary conditions.
Find non-obvious solutions. Three layers — obvious, unexpected, reframed — using disruption techniques that force the search off its default path.
Every output must be unassailable. Nothing wrong with form, content, length, logic, precision, completeness, or necessity.
Identify cognitive operations that don't have explicit procedures yet. Observes thinking processes, surfaces implicit steps and tacit knowledge, formalizes them into explicit procedures, tests, and refines.
Discover what users actually need versus what they say they need. Observes behavior, identifies pain points, maps workarounds, traces root desires, validates with evidence, and outputs a need hierarchy.
Reason about what someone actually needs based on what they said. Surfaces underlying needs, unstated constraints, and what would truly satisfy the request.
Systematically construct and examine the best possible outcome — what would ideal actually look like, and what would it take to get there?
For any obvious strategy, ask what if we did the exact opposite. Counters the tendency to accept first-good-enough answers.