systems-thinking-skills

Diagnose a hard problem by building an evidence-graded "Why Tree" - a Goldratt Current-Reality Tree that fans many AI agents across the problem's branch-space, grades every node by the kind of evidence behind it (validating measured numbers' pipelines before trusting them), tries to refute its own load-bearing branches, and converges on the ONE system constraint plus the cheapest test that would prove it. Use when someone asks "why is X happening / why are we falling short of a goal", wants a root-cause analysis with real rigor (not a 5-minute 5-Whys), needs to find the real bottleneck before spending build effort, or asks to "stress-test our diagnosis" / "build a current-reality tree". Also runs an **Idea Audit** - evaluating a product/feature idea by first diagnosing the problem it claims to solve (idea quarantined from the swarm), then judging the idea against the located constraint - trigger on "evaluate my product idea", "should I build X", "would anyone pay for this", "would my product have solved this"

Map elements of a stock-flow model to Donella Meadows' 12 leverage points, ranked by *promoted* impact for a stated goal and flagged for *wrong-direction* risk (the central Meadows warning that intuition usually pushes the right knob the wrong way). Triggers on "find leverage in my model", "where's the leverage", "Meadows leverage", "rank my interventions", "точки рычага", "найди рычаги в моей модели", "оцени точки воздействия". Refuses to invent stocks, flows, or parameters not present in the user's model. Refuses to return a ranking without an explicit, measurable goal.

Critique a hand-drawn stock-flow / causal-loop diagram and identify the system archetype. Use when the user wants to analyze a stock-flow diagram, validate stocks/flows/loops, identify a system archetype (the eight from Pegasus/Senge - Limits to Growth/Success, Shifting the Burden + Addiction, Fixes That Fail, Drifting Goals, Escalation, Growth and Underinvestment, Success to the Successful, Tragedy of the Commons), find leverage points (Meadows hierarchy), or prepare a system dynamics model for simulation. Triggers on Russian and English requests like "разбери мою stock-flow диаграмму", "какой это архетип", "leverage points", "critique my causal loop diagram", "limits to growth", "shifting the burden", "fixes that fail", "drifting goals", "escalation", "tragedy of the commons", "success to the successful", "growth and underinvestment", "дрейф целей", "эскалация", "трагедия общин", "успех успешным", "подготовь модель к симуляции". Refuses to design a diagram from scratch - the user must hand-draw first.

Take a trade-off ("improving X worsens Y") and dissolve it with TRIZ. Directs the model to act as the contradiction matrix — scanning the full set of 40 inventive principles + the 4 separation principles + ideality/resource analysis (which the LLM already knows) — while enforcing the discipline it skips unprompted - reframe as a physical contradiction, state the Ideal Final Result, separate dissolvable STRUCTURE from irreducible PHYSICS, generate 3-5 genuinely different STRUCTURAL resolutions (each naming the principle), and run each through the dissolve-vs-relocate test (did the cost leave the system, or just move?). Triggers on "dissolve this trade-off", "resolve the contradiction", "TRIZ", "I'm stuck on a trade-off", "thorough vs fast", "раствори компромисс", "разреши противоречие", "ТРИЗ", "застрял на компромиссе". Refuses to return "find the optimal balance" as an answer, to fake a dissolution for a real law, or to call a cost-relocation a dissolution.

Find the ONE binding constraint in a flow/process system using Goldratt's Theory of Constraints, classify it as a RESOURCE or (usually) a POLICY, and return the 5 Focusing Steps as concrete actions — Exploit and Subordinate before Elevate. Judges every move against the goal in throughput terms (Throughput up, Inventory down, Operating Expense down). Triggers on "find my constraint", "what's my bottleneck", "theory of constraints", "5 focusing steps", "where's the pile", "найди ограничение", "где узкое место", "теория ограничений", "пять шагов фокусировки". Refuses to optimize non-constraints, to Elevate before Exploit/Subordinate, to proceed without a goal, or to force a single constraint on a demand-constrained or exploratory system.

Commission an interactive stock-flow simulation web app from your AI coding agent (Claude Code or Codex). Use when the user wants to turn a hand-drawn or W2-graded stock-flow diagram into a runnable simulation with sliders. Triggers on Russian and English requests like "построй симуляцию моей модели", "сделай симуляцию из диаграммы", "build a simulation of my stock-flow model", "turn my diagram into code", "сделай интерактивную модель", "stock-flow simulation app", "system dynamics simulator". Refuses to invent equations, parameters, or model structure - those come from the human's diagram. Gates on a measurable, time-bound goal carrying a contradiction (an antagonist to the key parameter) before building - a model with no contradiction is arithmetic, not system dynamics. Refuses to ship code without a successful hand-computed extraction test.