question-upgrader

name	question-upgrader
description	Use when someone is asking a question that is too narrow, too closed, or based on a hidden assumption that may be wrong. Upgrades weak questions and generates meta-questions to check whether the right question is even being asked. Triggers on:
scenarios	["Is this even the right question to be asking?","Should I use microservices? (upgrade this)","How do I get my team to work harder?","이 질문이 맞는지 모르겠어, 더 좋은 질문으로 바꿔줘","어떤 질문을 해야 할지 모르겠어","이 문제에 어떻게 접근해야 할지 질문 자체가 불명확해"]
compatibility	{"recommended":["think-tool"],"optional":["sequential-thinking"],"remote_mcp_note":"think-tool이 있으면 메타 질문 분석(질문이 올바른가?)을 먼저 실행하고 그 다음 질문 업그레이드를 진행하는 순서를 지킬 수 있습니다. Claude 설정 → MCP Servers에서 remote SSE 엔드포인트를 추가하세요."}

Question Upgrader

When to Use / When Not to Use

Use when:

• Someone asks a yes/no question about a complex topic
• The question has a solution embedded in it ("should I use X?")
• The framing of the question seems to be the obstacle, not the answer
• You suspect the question is answering the wrong level of problem

Not for:

• Questions that are already well-formed — confirm they're good and proceed
• Simple factual queries that don't have embedded assumptions

Process

Run Part 2 (meta-questions) first, then Part 1 (upgrade moves).

MCP note: If sequential-thinking is available, enforce this order: meta-question analysis → surface-form upgrade. Skipping meta-questions polishes the wrong question.

Part 2 — Meta-Question Check (run first)

Before upgrading, ask:

1. Is this the right question? Does answering it perfectly solve the underlying problem?
2. What assumption is embedded? Every question assumes something. Surface it.
3. What would a more useful question be? Generate 3 alternatives at a different level or angle.
4. Who is best positioned to answer this? Right person, data source, or part of yourself?
5. What would change if you had the answer? If nothing — the question is academic, not urgent.
6. What question are you afraid to ask? Usually the most useful one.

Part 1 — Upgrade Moves

Weak pattern	Move	Stronger form
"Should I do X?"	Conditional	"What would need to be true for X to be right?"
"How do I get X?"	Why/What first	"What is actually preventing X right now?"
"Is X good?"	Stakes + context	"Good for whom, by what measure, over what timeframe?"
"What is the best Y?"	Scope + constraints	"Best for [specific goal] given [specific constraints]?"
"How do I fix Z?"	Diagnosis	"Is Z actually the problem, or a symptom?"

Additional moves: inversion ("What would guarantee I fail?"), adding time horizon, removing embedded solution.

Output Template

1. Original question — restated for reference
2. What makes it weak — one sentence: closed/assumptive/embedded solution/wrong level
3. Hidden assumption — what is being taken for granted
4. Upgraded question(s) — 1–3 stronger formulations
5. Why each upgrade unlocks better thinking — one sentence per
6. The question you might be avoiding — always include, not optional

What Claude Does / What You Do

Claude	You
Runs meta-question check to verify it's worth upgrading	Provide the question or problem framing
Names the specific weakness before upgrading	Confirm whether the hidden assumption resonates
Produces 1–3 upgraded questions maximum	Choose which upgraded question to actually pursue
Surfaces the question being avoided	Decide whether to confront that question

Related Skills

• assumption-extractor — for digging into the hidden premises a question rests on
• clarity-toolkit — when the problem is vague goals rather than weak questions
• mental-model-toolkit — for reframing the problem itself when the question reveals a stuck frame