Menu
Use Socratic questioning to reveal assumptions
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
Break a whole into parts at its natural joints
Tile the space of possible futures and evaluate strategies across the tiles. Blends part-whole decomposition with tree and graph of thought. This skill should be used when the user asks "what if", "what could happen if", "evaluate possible futures", "map the scenarios", "explore how this could play out", "compare futures", "stress-test this plan against the future", or faces a decision whose outcome hinges on unresolved uncertainties. Ends with a single reasoned recommendation plus the conditions that would flip it.
Distributed navigation system for multi-file pipelines and processes. Creates compact, grep-friendly waypoint markers that orient readers within complex cross-file workflows — each file carries its own ID, role, adjacent nodes, and a pointer to the full map. Use when asked to "point me to", "where does X begin/end", "map this pipeline", "add waypoints", "trace this process", or when working with processes spanning many files that need discoverability without centralized documentation that drifts.
Ask a genuinely good question — or a composed set of them — in the moment, to discover, clarify, probe, or confirm, in any conversation or domain. Use when about to ask the user something or use the `AskUserQuestion` tool, when a question fell flat or one won't reach and you need a set, when the user's tone or messages signal you have drifted from what they need, or when the user wants questions phrased, generated, or sharpened — "read this spec and generate questions", "ask about the schema", "review this and ask questions", "help me understand what to ask", or to clarify a requirement or idea.
Communicate ideas and information to others with purpose, clarity, and integrity. Ensure that artifacts are structured and phrased in a way that is mindful of their audience while avoiding AI slop patterns. Use when the user requests assistance with writing, commentary, or communication; when they point out AI slop, when they ask things like "help me say", "write for [a specific audience or context]", "polish [comments, sentences, artifacts]", or the like.
Visualize data, concepts, relations, or diagrams. Produces browser-runnable HTML charts and markdown outputs that drop into pull requests, READMEs, tickets, and chat. Use whenever the user asks to visualize anything, make a chart or diagram, plot a trend, compare numbers, show a flow or timeline, or pick the right chart type.
| name | thinkies-question-through-dialogue |
| description | Use Socratic questioning to reveal assumptions |
Follow these steps:
Establish exactly what is being asserted — vague claims resist examination. Press for precise definitions, concrete examples, and boundaries ("What exactly do you mean by X?", "Is this always true, or only sometimes?").
Surface unstated premises: what must be true for the claim to work? What if those prerequisites don't hold? Where do edge cases break them? Work backwards ("this assumes…"), ask "when wouldn't this apply?" and "what if the opposite were true?"
Categorize each assumption:
Identify which assumptions are load-bearing — if they fail, everything fails.
What supports the claim? How do we know it's true? Do alternative explanations exist? Do conclusions actually follow, or do inferential leaps hide gaps? Ask "what would disprove this?" — unfalsifiable claims often can't be verified either.
Follow the claim to its conclusions: what else must be true if this is? What consequences emerge? Does it conflict with established beliefs? Forward projection reveals contradictions the claim itself hides.
Is the right inquiry being pursued? Why does this question matter? What is actually being sought? Would a different framing serve better? The question asked is sometimes a symptom of a deeper one.
Articulate what the questioning revealed: where reasoning stands on solid ground, where uncertainty remains, which assumptions proved critical, what questions still need answers.
