메뉴
Finds paths around a fixed constraint without removing it — routing around a hard limit to reach the same goal. Triggers: 'work around this', 'given this constraint', 'path around the blocker', 'how do we do this anyway', 'constrained solution'.
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
SOC 직업 분류 기준
Master orchestration skill. Takes any situation in plain English, identifies the underlying goal, designs a multi-skill reasoning workflow, and executes it sequentially — feeding each skill's output into the next. Use when you say 'help me think through this', 'I need to figure out what to do', 'where do I start', or any time you want structured thinking applied end-to-end rather than routed to a single tool.
Tests whether the parts of something form a unified whole — finding the jarring inconsistencies that accumulate when different contributors work without a shared vision. TRIGGERS: 'coherence check', 'does this feel unified', 'something feels off', 'inconsistent', 'check the whole', 'does this hang together'.
Tests whether a solution is more complex than it needs to be — distinguishing necessary complexity from accidental complexity that accreted over time. TRIGGERS: 'elegance test', 'is this too complex', 'over-engineered', 'is there a simpler way', 'does this feel right'.
Identifies the underlying formal pattern at work — because most successful designs, arguments, and solutions share deep structural patterns, and naming the pattern unlocks the playbook. TRIGGERS: 'what pattern is this', 'pattern recognition', 'why does this work', 'identify the form', 'what structure is at play', 'what archetype is this'.
Finds the simpler version while preserving what matters — not arbitrary reduction, but finding the core and discarding what is not it. TRIGGERS: 'find the simple version', 'simplify this', 'what's the essence', 'less but better', 'strip it back', 'what could we remove'.
Entry point for the aesthetic toolkit. Routes to the right aesthetic skill based on your situation. Use when you say 'aesthetic', 'check the design', 'does this feel right', 'is this elegant', 'is this too complex', 'what pattern is this', 'find the simpler version', or want an aesthetic lens applied without knowing which specific tool fits.
| name | s4h-constraint-workaround-mapping |
| description | Finds paths around a fixed constraint without removing it — routing around a hard limit to reach the same goal. Triggers: 'work around this', 'given this constraint', 'path around the blocker', 'how do we do this anyway', 'constrained solution'. |
Some constraints are real and cannot be inverted or removed. The question then is not how to eliminate the constraint, but how to route around it to the same destination. A workaround is not a compromise — it is a valid path that respects a real limit while still delivering the outcome.
Step 1: State the Constraint and Confirm It's Hard Write the constraint. Then confirm: is this actually fixed? A truly hard constraint has a concrete source — law, technical impossibility, signed contract. If the source is unclear, use constraint-hardness-testing first.
Framing check: Confirm the specific constraint and the goal it is blocking before continuing. State what you've identified — the actual constraint and the outcome the user is trying to reach — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:
Step 2: Map the Exact Boundary What does this constraint specifically prevent? What does it explicitly not prevent? Most constraints are narrower than they appear. Mapping the boundary precisely reveals the space around it.
Step 3: List All Paths Blocked Enumerate every approach to the goal that the constraint forecloses. Be thorough — you are building a map of what's off the table.
Step 4: Find Adjacent Paths For each blocked path: is there an adjacent path that reaches the same goal without crossing the constraint? Adjacent means achieving the same underlying outcome through a different mechanism — not a lesser outcome through the same mechanism.
Step 5: Generate 3-5 Workarounds with Cost
Before narrowing: Show the complete set of adjacent paths identified in Step 4 to the user first. Use AskUserQuestion:
For each viable adjacent path, state the cost relative to the direct approach: additional time, complexity, dependency, quality reduction, or reversibility loss.
Step 6: Select Best Cost/Benefit Choose the workaround where the cost is lowest relative to the outcome achieved. If all workarounds are too costly, the right answer may be to re-examine the goal.
Before proceeding, use the AskUserQuestion tool. State your interpretation of the situation in 1–2 sentences — what is being analyzed and what the core question is — then ask:
Proceed based on their selection. If the user reframes, incorporate the correction before running any analysis.
Constraint:
[Statement + source confirming it's hard]
Constraint boundary:
Blocked paths:
[Bulleted list]
Workarounds:
| # | Path | How it reaches the goal | Cost vs direct path |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | |||
| 2 | |||
| 3 |
Recommended path:
[Workaround name] — [rationale for cost/benefit selection]
The map is only useful if the constraint boundary in Step 2 is drawn accurately. People regularly assume constraints block more than they do — which is why checking what a constraint does NOT prevent is as important as what it does.
After delivering this output, use AskUserQuestion to offer the next move:
/s4h-decision-option-mapping — Map decision options using the available workarounds/s4h-logic-check — Validate the logic of the proposed workarounds/s4h-decision-premortem-analysis — Stress-test each workaround before committing