wicked-garden-deliberate

name	wicked-garden-deliberate
user-invocable	true
description	Critical thinking framework applied before doing work. Challenges assumptions, reframes problems, identifies hidden opportunities, and validates whether the stated ask is the right ask. A way of approaching work, not a specialist discipline. Use when: challenging assumptions before implementation, reframing a stated problem, asking whether the right thing is being asked at all, "deliberate on this", "deliberate #42" (a GitHub issue number), "critically analyze this request before implementing", `--deep` (blast-radius analysis), `--batch` (multiple issues, shared root causes), or any former /wicked-garden:deliberate invocation.
phase_relevance	["clarify","design"]
archetype_relevance	["*"]

Deliberate

A structured way of thinking about work before doing it. Applied to any request — bugs, features, enhancements, content, design, infrastructure — to ensure we're solving the right problem the right way.

When to Use

• Before accepting any work request at face value
• During crew clarify and design phases (auto-integrated)
• When triaging issues, tickets, or ad-hoc asks
• Any time the gut response is "just do it" — pause and deliberate first

The Five Lenses

1. Is This Real?

Challenge the premise before solving it.

• Is the reported problem actually a problem, or is it working as intended?
• Is this a symptom or the root cause? Would fixing it just move the pain?
• What's the evidence? Observed behavior, user feedback, or speculation?
• What's the cost of doing nothing? Sometimes inaction is the right action.

2. What's Actually Going On?

If the problem is real, dig to the root.

• Trace the issue to its origin — don't stop at the first explanation
• Is this a design flaw wearing a different mask?
• Map the blast radius: what else shares the same root cause?
• Is the framing itself wrong? (e.g., "the button is broken" vs "the flow is confusing")

3. What Else Can We Fix While We're Here?

Every change is a window into the surrounding code/content/system.

• Are there adjacent areas suffering from the same weakness?
• Can we generalize instead of point-fixing?
• Is there duplication that should be consolidated?
• Would a structural change prevent entire categories of similar asks?

See refs/opportunity-patterns.md for common patterns.

4. Should We Rethink the Design?

Step back further. Is the current approach the right one?

• Would a different structure make this problem disappear entirely?
• Are we patching around a leaky abstraction or flawed model?
• Is the boundary in the wrong place?
• What would we build if starting fresh with today's knowledge?

See refs/rethink-framework.md for evaluation.

5. Is There a Better Way?

Before committing to the obvious solution, explore alternatives.

• Can we solve this by removing instead of adding?
• Can we solve this with configuration instead of code?
• Is there a simpler approach that covers 90% of cases?
• What are we trading off with each option?

Output: Deliberation Brief

## Deliberation Brief: {title}

### Assessment
**Validity**: Real problem / Symptom / Not a problem / Wrong framing
**Root cause**: {actual cause, not what was reported}
**Blast radius**: {what else is affected by the same root cause}

### Opportunities
**Cleanup**: {what can be improved alongside}
**Generalization**: {can we abstract or consolidate?}
**Rethink**: {should we redesign the approach?}

### Recommendation
**Strategy**: Fix / Redesign / Generalize / Defer / Close
**Rationale**: {why this approach over alternatives}
**Scope**: Expand / Contract / Same — {what changed from original ask}

### Guidance
{specific direction for whoever does the work}

Domain-Specific Depth

The five lenses are universal. The refs provide depth for specific contexts:

• refs/run-workflow.md — Operational runbook for user-invoked deliberations: GH issue parsing, context gathering, Explore-agent dispatch, brief presentation, memory storage, crew integration, batch mode
• refs/opportunity-patterns.md — Structural patterns that signal cleanup opportunities
• refs/rethink-framework.md — When and how to propose a redesign
• refs/code-lens.md — Code-specific patterns (error handling, abstractions, tech debt)
• refs/content-lens.md — Content/docs patterns (messaging, structure, audience)
• refs/design-lens.md — Design patterns (UX flows, information architecture)
• refs/architecture-lens.md — System patterns (boundaries, dependencies, scaling)
• refs/data-lens.md — Data patterns (pipelines, schemas, quality, contracts)
• refs/ops-lens.md — Ops patterns (incidents, reliability, deployment, observability)
• refs/security-lens.md — Security patterns (auth, vulnerabilities, threat models, compliance)
• refs/product-lens.md — Product patterns (user needs, prioritization, value, strategy)
• refs/testing-lens.md — Testing patterns (test strategy, flakiness, coverage, test design)
• refs/timing-lens.md — Timing patterns (urgency, sequencing, premature optimization)
• refs/assumptions-lens.md — Assumption patterns (hidden dependencies, fragile premises)

Integration

• Crew workflow: Auto-invoked during clarify and design phases
• Standalone: invoke this skill with {description or GH#} [--deep] [--batch] — then follow refs/run-workflow.md
• Batch: --batch "280,281" — process multiple issues together to find shared root causes (see the runbook)