Menu
Pause before committing to the current solution. Challenge your own reasoning, assumptions, and design. Look for a better approach before proceeding.
Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
Based on SOC occupation classification
Safely remove dead code and consolidate duplicates. Two modes — DEAD-CODE (remove unreachable/unused code) and DUPLICATE (merge copy-paste into one canonical). Detect with stack-appropriate tools, VERIFY every hit with grep, then classify DELETE (true dead) vs KEEP (reusable utilities/helpers/scopes — never delete on a tool signal alone). Stack-aware. Use when the user says "cleanup", "clean up codebase", "dead code", "remove dead code", "remove unused code", "find unused code", "unused code", "declutter", "tech debt", "duplicate code", "consolidate duplicates", "copy-paste code".
Documentation workflow with two modes — SINGLE (hand-author a specific doc like README/API.md/ARCHITECTURE.md with full control over voice) and FULL (auto-generate the whole docs/ site — business, architecture, use-cases with sequence diagrams, README index — with a 3-iteration review loop). Use when user says "document", "generate docs", "write docs", "create documentation", "update docs", "sync docs", "sync documentation", "doc sync".
Feature lifecycle workflow — build new features in the project's own architecture, refactor existing code (into DDD when asked), add/integrate APIs, or deprecate features. Stack-aware with phase-based checks and a review loop. Use when user says "implement feature", "add feature", "build feature", "create feature", "new feature", "refactor", "clean up", "improve code", "restructure", "migrate to ddd", "refactor ddd", "integrate api", "add endpoint", "new api", "connect api", "api integration", "deprecate", "remove feature", "sunset", "phase out", "delete feature".
Tracked development loop — first brainstorm + plan and get user approval, THEN checkout a branch, build a task checklist, and loop each item through test → implement → verify → fix → mark done → commit (one commit per item). Use when user says "bắt đầu loop", "làm track này", "tracked loop", "checklist driven dev", "run the loop", "checkout branch and start track", "brainstorm rồi làm track", "implement with checklist and commit per task".
Bug fixing workflow with two depths — QUICK (fast fix + rollback plan when cause is clear) and DEEP (systematic root-cause investigation for hard, intermittent, or recurring bugs). Use when fixing bugs, hotfixes, urgent issues, production bugs, or when user says "fix bug", "hotfix", "urgent fix", "production issue", "deep debug", "deep-debug", "trace bug", "find root cause", "hard bug", "investigate bug".
Incident response workflow for handling production issues. Use when there's an incident, outage, production down, or when user says "incident", "outage", "production down", "service down", "emergency".
| name | challenge |
| description | Pause before committing to the current solution. Challenge your own reasoning, assumptions, and design. Look for a better approach before proceeding. |
You are no longer defending the current solution.
Become its strongest critic.
Assume there may be a simpler, safer, or more correct approach.
Your goal is not to find flaws at all costs.
Your goal is to determine whether the current direction is truly the best one.
Ask yourself:
Ignore the current implementation.
Would I build it the same way?
If not, why?
Identify the assumption most likely to be wrong.
Explain how it could fail.
Briefly describe one different approach.
Do not choose it automatically.
State its main tradeoff.
Finish with one of:
Explain why the alternatives are not better.
or
Explain what should change and why.
Never change the code automatically. Never fabricate issues.
