thought-organizer

name	thought-organizer
description	Use when raw, scattered ideas or notes need structure before writing, presenting, or deciding. Triggers on: "생각 정리해줘", "노트 정리", "머릿속이 복잡해", "아이디어 구조화", "outline 만들어줘", mind map", "이거 어떻게 엮어야 해?", "글 쓰기 전에 구조 잡아줘", "산만한 생각 정리".
scenarios	["머릿속에 있는 것들 정리 좀 해줘","이 노트들 구조화해서 아웃라인 만들어줘","I have a bunch of ideas — help me see how they relate","발표 전에 내용 구조 잡아야 해","앱 만들고 싶은데 생각이 너무 산만해","복잡한 개념들 연결해서 정리해줘"]
compatibility	{"recommended":["think-tool"],"optional":["sequential-thinking"],"remote_mcp_note":"think-tool이 있으면 구조화 후 모순·누락·미해결 긴장을 체계적으로 검토할 수 있습니다. Claude 설정 → MCP Servers에서 remote SSE 엔드포인트를 추가하세요."}
related	["brainstorming","first-principles"]

Thought Organizer

Takes messy, scattered input — rough notes, half-formed ideas, stream-of-consciousness text — and produces clear, structured output with hierarchy, connections, and a distilled core message.

Core Workflow

1. Absorb — Read all input without filtering. Identify every distinct idea, no matter how fragmented.
2. Extract atoms — Pull out the smallest meaningful units (claims, questions, observations, feelings).
   • Checkpoint: Have you captured everything, including implicit assumptions? If not, ask one focused clarifying question before continuing.
3. Cluster — Group atoms by theme or relationship. Name each cluster with a short label.
4. Rank — Identify the single core claim or goal. Mark supporting ideas vs. tangential ones.
5. Structure — Choose the right output shape (see Techniques below) and build the hierarchy.
6. Surface gaps — Note what is missing, contradictory, or unresolved. Flag explicitly.
7. Deliver — Present the structured output, then offer next steps (expand a section, convert to draft, add sources).

MCP Usage

• sequential-thinking: Invoke for steps 3–5 when input contains more than ~5 distinct ideas or the user explicitly requests a structured breakdown. Each step's output should be passed explicitly as input to the next.
• think-tool: Invoke at step 6 (Surface gaps). Use it to enumerate contradictions, missing evidence, and unresolved tensions before delivering output.

Technique Selection

Choose the output shape before structuring. Use this table:

Situation	Technique
Goal is a document, essay, or presentation	Outline
User says "map" or input has no clear hierarchy	Mind Map
5+ ideas with named cross-links or a knowledge-base goal	Zettelkasten
User needs only the core message, not full structure	Core Claim Extraction

Techniques

Outline (default for writing prep)

Use numbered hierarchy. Start with the core claim as the title.

Core Claim / Title
  1. First main point
     1.1 Supporting detail
     1.2 Example
  2. Second main point
     2.1 ...
  3. Counterargument or tension
  Conclusion / So what?

Text Mind Map (for visual thinkers)

Use indented branching. Center node first, branches radiate out.

[CENTER: Core topic]
├── Branch A
│   ├── Sub-idea A1
│   └── Sub-idea A2
├── Branch B
│   └── Sub-idea B1
└── Branch C (tension / open question)

Zettelkasten-style Concept Linking

For complex ideas with many cross-connections. Each atom gets an ID and explicit links.

[001] Core claim: ...
[002] Supporting evidence → links to [001]
[003] Counterexample → challenges [001], see also [004]
[004] Resolution or reframe → synthesizes [001] + [003]
[?]   Open question: ...

Use this when ideas recur across different contexts or the user wants to build a knowledge base rather than a single document.

Core Claim Extraction

When the user just needs the essence:

핵심 주장: [one sentence]
근거:
  - ...
  - ...
반론 가능성: ...
다음 질문: ...

Concrete Examples

Example 1 — Messy Input to Outline

Input:

"앱 만들고 싶은데, 사람들이 독서 기록을 남기는 거. 소셜 기능도 있으면 좋겠고, 근데 너무 복잡해질 것 같고, 일단 혼자 쓸 수 있어야 하고, 나중에 친구한테 추천도 하고 싶고, 책 표지 이미지도 넣고 싶어."

Output:

독서 기록 앱

1. 핵심 가치: 개인 독서 이력 관리
   1.1 책 검색 및 등록 (표지 이미지 포함)
   1.2 독서 상태 추적 (읽는 중 / 완료 / 읽고 싶음)
   1.3 메모 및 감상 기록

2. 소셜 기능 (2단계)
   2.1 친구에게 책 추천 공유
   2.2 독서 피드 (선택적 공개)

3. 미결 사항
   - 소셜 기능은 MVP 이후로 분리할 것 (복잡도 관리)
   - 책 데이터 소스 결정 필요 (Open Library, 알라딘 API 등)

See references/examples.md for more examples: essay framing and philosophical concept linking.

Output Format Rules

• Always start with the structured output — do not summarize the input back to the user first.
• Label clearly: outline, mind map, concept map, or core claim extraction.
• Flag gaps or contradictions with a dedicated section (미결 / Open Questions).
• Keep language consistent with the user's input language (한국어 입력 → 한국어 출력).
• Offer one concrete next step at the end (e.g., "이 아웃라인으로 초안 써드릴까요?").

Constraints

MUST DO

• Preserve the user's original intent — do not impose a narrative
• Separate facts/claims from feelings/attitudes when both are present
• Make hierarchy explicit (numbering, indentation, IDs)
• Surface contradictions rather than smoothing them over
• Ask at most one clarifying question if input is too sparse to structure

MUST NOT DO

• Do not paraphrase the raw input back without structuring it
• Do not add ideas the user did not express
• Do not pick a structure type without considering what serves the content best
• Do not skip the "gaps" step — unresolved tensions are valuable

Related Skills

• brainstorming — 구조화 후 새로운 아이디어나 설계 방향이 필요할 때
• first-principles — 정리된 아이디어 중 근본 가정을 검증하고 싶을 때