| name | think |
| description | Thinking mode router — selects the right analytical approach for a question. Use when thinking through a problem, analyzing deeply, brainstorming ideas, debating options, decomposing to root cause, challenging assumptions, or exploring from multiple perspectives. |
| argument-hint | <question or topic> |
Route $ARGUMENTS to the right thinking mode based on intent. Detect the mode from context — do NOT ask.
Routing
| Intent signals | Mode | How to invoke |
|---|
| decompose, root cause, fundamental, challenge assumptions, first principles, why is X happening | First Principles | Use the Skill tool to invoke first-principles with $ARGUMENTS |
| debate, weigh options, multiple viewpoints, perspectives, deliberate, should I, which is better | Council | Use the Skill tool to invoke council with $ARGUMENTS |
| brainstorm, creative, divergent, ideas, what if, possibilities, how could we, make it better | Creative | Follow the Creative steps below with $ARGUMENTS |
| think through, analyze, explore deeply, examine from angles, tradeoffs, what are the implications | Deep Analysis | Follow the Deep Analysis steps below with $ARGUMENTS |
If intent is ambiguous, default to Deep Analysis.
Creative
Divergent ideation — quantity and variety over polish.
- Restate the challenge in one sentence
- Obvious solutions — 2-3 conventional approaches (acknowledge, then move past)
- Wild ideas — 5-7 unconventional approaches. Mix:
- Inversion (what if we did the opposite?)
- Analogy (how does a different domain solve this?)
- Removal (what if we deleted the constraint?)
- Combination (what if we merged two approaches?)
- Diamond pick — which 1-2 wild ideas have real potential and why
- Next step — one concrete action to explore the best idea
Deep Analysis
Multi-angle exploration for complex topics.
- Frame the question precisely — what is actually being asked?
- Technical — mechanics, constraints, and trade-offs
- Practical — what does this look like in practice? What's the effort and friction?
- Strategic — how does this fit the bigger picture? What does it enable or block?
- Tensions — where do the angles disagree? What can't be optimized simultaneously?
- Synthesis — what the analysis reveals that wasn't obvious at the surface
Examples
Example 1 → First Principles
User: "why is our test suite so slow?"
→ Intent: root cause, decompose
→ Invoke first-principles: "Why is the test suite slow?"
→ Break down: what makes tests slow? → I/O, parallelism, fixtures, network calls
→ Challenge each assumption: are all these tests necessary? Is the slowness uniform?
Example 2 → Council
User: "should we use a monorepo or separate repos?"
→ Intent: debate, weigh options
→ Invoke council with the question
→ Multiple perspectives argue in parallel, then synthesize
Example 3 → Creative
User: "how could we make onboarding more engaging?"
→ Intent: brainstorm, possibilities
→ Restate: "How do we make first-run onboarding feel less like a form?"
→ Obvious: wizard steps, progress bar, skip option
→ Wild: game mechanic for first task, video from the AI, co-pilot mode for first session
→ Diamond pick: co-pilot mode — high novelty, directly addresses the friction
Example 4 → Deep Analysis
User: "what are the tradeoffs of server-side rendering?"
→ Intent: explore tradeoffs, implications
→ Technical: hydration cost, TTFB vs TTI, caching strategies
→ Practical: team expertise, deployment complexity, SEO requirements
→ Strategic: enables progressive enhancement, constrains client-side interactivity
→ Tensions: performance vs interactivity, simplicity vs capability
→ Synthesis: SSR is a distribution of complexity, not a removal of it
Anti-patterns
- Don't ask which mode to use. Detect from context and commit. The routing table is the decision — use it.
- Don't use Deep Analysis as the default for everything. "Should I do X or Y?" is Council. "Why is X broken?" is First Principles. Reserve Deep Analysis for genuine multi-angle exploration.
- Don't produce shallow Creative output. Wild ideas must genuinely challenge constraints — listing 5 obvious variations is not creative thinking.
- Don't skip the Tensions section in Deep Analysis. If you can't find a tension, you haven't analyzed deeply enough.
- Don't combine modes in one response. Pick one and commit. Mixing modes produces unfocused output.
- Don't over-explain the routing. One line is enough: "This is a root-cause question — First Principles." Then do the work.
Rules
- Mode detection is mandatory — classify before starting, state it in one line
- First Principles and Council are delegated — always invoke those skills rather than reimplementing them
- Creative and Deep Analysis run inline — follow the steps above directly
- Tensions are non-negotiable in Deep Analysis — name at least one real conflict between the angles
- Wild ideas in Creative must be genuinely unconventional — if a PM would have thought of it in 30 seconds, it's not wild enough
