@rune-kit/rune 2.10.0 → 2.11.0

package/skills/sequential-thinking/SKILL.md

@@ -1,234 +1,234 @@
----
-name: sequential-thinking
-description: "Step-by-step complex reasoning for multi-variable problems. Breaks interconnected decisions into ordered logical steps with bias detection, reversibility classification, and second-order effect tracking."
-metadata:
-  author: runedev
-  version: "0.3.0"
-  layer: L3
-  model: sonnet
-  group: reasoning
-  tools: "Read, Glob, Grep"
----
-
-# sequential-thinking
-
-## Purpose
-
-Multi-variable analysis utility for decisions where factors are interdependent and order of reasoning matters. Receives a decision problem, classifies reversibility, detects cognitive biases, maps variable dependencies, processes them in dependency order, checks for second-order effects, and returns a structured decision tree with final recommendation. Stateless — no memory between calls.
-
-## Calls (outbound)
-
-None — pure L3 reasoning utility.
-
-## Called By (inbound)
-
-- `debug` (L2): multi-factor bugs with interacting causes
-- `plan` (L2): complex architecture with many trade-offs
-- `brainstorm` (L2): evaluating approaches with many variables
-
-## When to Use
-
-Invoke this skill when:
-- The decision has more than 3 interacting variables
-- Choosing option A changes what options are valid for B and C
-- Architecture decisions have cascading downstream effects
-- Trade-off analysis where constraints eliminate entire solution branches
-
-Do NOT use for simple linear analysis — `problem-solver` is more efficient for single-dimension reasoning.
-
-## Execution
-
-### Input
-
-```
-decision: string        — the decision or problem to analyze
-variables: string[]     — (optional) pre-identified factors; if omitted, skill identifies them
-constraints: string[]   — (optional) hard limits that eliminate options
-goal: string            — (optional) success criteria or desired outcome
-```
-
-### Step 0 — Reversibility Classification
-
-Before investing analytical effort, classify the decision:
-
-| Type | Definition | Analytical Effort |
-|------|-----------|-------------------|
-| **Two-way door** | Reversible, can iterate, low switching cost | Decide quickly, set review date. Light analysis. |
-| **One-way door** | Irreversible, high stakes, costly to reverse | Full sequential analysis. Deep reasoning. |
-| **Partially reversible** | Some aspects reversible, some not | Full analysis on irreversible aspects, light on reversible. |
-
-If two-way door → streamline: skip Step 4 (second-order) and Step 5 (bias cross-check). State reasoning.
-
-### Step 1 — Identify All Variables
-
-List every factor that affects the decision. For each variable, record:
-- Name and description
-- Possible values or range
-- Whether it is controllable (we can choose) or fixed (constraint from environment)
-
-If the caller provided `variables`, validate and expand the list. If omitted, derive from the decision statement.
-
-### Step 2 — Map Dependencies
-
-For each pair of variables, determine if a dependency exists:
-- `[A] constrains [B]`: choosing a value for A limits valid values for B
-- `[A] influences [B]`: A affects the cost/benefit calculation for B but does not eliminate options
-- `[A] independent of [B]`: no relationship
-
-Document dependencies as: `[Variable A] → [Variable B]: [type and reason]`
-
-Identify which variables have the most outbound dependencies — those must be resolved first.
-
-### Step 3 — Evaluate in Dependency Order
-
-Sort variables from most-constrained (fixed / most depended upon) to least-constrained (free / most flexible). Process in that order:
-
-For each variable in sequence:
-- State current known state of all previously resolved variables
-- Evaluate valid options given those constraints
-- Select the best option with explicit reasoning
-- Record the conclusion and how it affects downstream variables
-
-Do not jump ahead — each step must reference the conclusions of prior steps.
-
-**Running state block** at each step:
-
-```
-State after Step N:
-- [Variable A]: resolved to [value] because [reason]
-- [Variable B]: resolved to [value] because [reason]
-- Remaining: [Variable C], [Variable D]
-```
-
-### Step 4 — Second-Order Effects Check
-
-After all variables are resolved, apply second-order thinking:
-
-For each resolved variable, ask: **"And then what?"**
-
-| Variable | First-Order Effect | Second-Order Effect | Risk Level |
-|----------|-------------------|--------------------|-|
-| [A = value] | [immediate consequence] | [consequence of consequence] | low/medium/high |
-
-Flag any second-order effect that:
-- Contradicts the goal stated in the input
-- Creates a feedback loop (reinforcing or balancing)
-- Affects stakeholders not considered in the analysis
-- Would flip a previous variable's optimal value
-
-If a dangerous second-order effect is found → revisit the affected variable with this new information.
-
-### Step 5 — Bias Cross-Check
-
-Check the analysis for the 3 biases most dangerous to multi-variable decisions:
-
-| Bias | Detection Question | If Detected |
-|------|-------------------|-------------|
-| **Anchoring** | Did the first variable we resolved disproportionately constrain all others? Would the result differ if we started from a different variable? | Re-evaluate with a different starting variable. Compare results. |
-| **Status Quo** | Did we give an unfair advantage to "keep current approach" for any variable? Would we choose this if starting from scratch? | Evaluate current state with same rigor as alternatives. |
-| **Overconfidence** | How confident are we in each variable's resolution? Are confidence intervals wide enough? | Assign explicit confidence % to each resolution. Flag any > 90% without strong evidence. |
-
-If bias is detected → note it in the report and state whether it changes the recommendation.
-
-### Step 6 — Synthesize
-
-After all variables are resolved and cross-checked:
-- Combine all per-step conclusions into a coherent final recommendation
-- Identify any variables that remained ambiguous — state what additional information would resolve them
-- Assess overall confidence: `high` (all variables resolved cleanly), `medium` (1-2 ambiguous), `low` (major uncertainty remains)
-- Note the reversibility classification from Step 0 — if two-way door, include a review date
-
-### Step 7 — Report
-
-Return the full decision tree and recommendation in the output format below.
-
-## Constraints
-
-- Never evaluate variable B before all variables that constrain B are resolved
-- If a dependency cycle is detected, flag it explicitly and break the cycle by treating one variable as a fixed assumption
-- Use Sonnet — reasoning depth and coherence across many steps matters
-- If more than 8 variables are identified, group related ones into composite variables to keep analysis tractable
-- MUST classify reversibility (Step 0) before investing analytical effort
-- MUST check for second-order effects on one-way door decisions
-- MUST run bias cross-check on one-way door decisions
-
-## Output Format
-
-```
-## Sequential Analysis: [Decision]
-
-### Reversibility: [two-way door / one-way door / partially reversible]
-[One sentence reasoning. If two-way: "Light analysis — decide quickly, review in [timeframe]."]
-
-### Variables Identified
-| Variable | Possible Values | Type |
-|----------|----------------|------|
-| [A]      | [options]      | controllable / fixed |
-| [B]      | [options]      | controllable / fixed |
-
-### Dependency Map
-- [A] → [B]: [type] — [reason]
-- [C] → [A]: [type] — [reason]
-
-### Step-by-Step Evaluation
-1. **[Variable A]** (no dependencies — evaluate first)
-   - Options: [x, y, z]
-   - Reasoning: [why one is better given constraints]
-   - Conclusion: **[chosen value]** (confidence: X%)
-   - State: { A: [value] }
-
-2. **[Variable B]** (depends on A = [value])
-   - Options remaining: [filtered list]
-   - Reasoning: [updated analysis given A's value]
-   - Conclusion: **[chosen value]** (confidence: X%)
-   - State: { A: [value], B: [value] }
-
-...
-
-### Second-Order Effects (one-way door only)
-| Variable | First-Order | Second-Order | Risk |
-|----------|------------|-------------|------|
-| [A] | [effect] | [and then what?] | low/medium/high |
-
-### Bias Check
-- ⚠️ [Bias]: [detection result] → [action taken or "not detected"]
-
-### Ambiguities
-- [variable or factor that could not be fully resolved, and what information would resolve it]
-
-### Final Recommendation
-[synthesized conclusion incorporating all resolved variables, with confidence level]
-
-- **Confidence**: high | medium | low
-- **Key assumption**: [the most critical assumption this recommendation depends on]
-- **Review date**: [when to revisit this decision, especially for two-way doors]
-```
-
-## Sharp Edges
-
-| Failure Mode | Severity | Mitigation |
-|---|---|---|
-| Evaluating variable B before all variables constraining B are resolved | CRITICAL | Dependency order is mandatory — sort by constraint depth first |
-| Dependency cycle detected but not flagged | HIGH | Break cycle by treating one variable as a fixed assumption — flag explicitly |
-| More than 8 variables without grouping | MEDIUM | Group related variables — keep tractable, not exhaustive |
-| Final recommendation missing confidence level | MEDIUM | Confidence (high/medium/low) is required — ambiguities drive confidence down |
-| Full analysis on a two-way door decision | MEDIUM | Step 0 classifies reversibility — two-way doors get light analysis |
-| Ignoring second-order effects on irreversible decisions | HIGH | Step 4 is mandatory for one-way doors — "and then what?" |
-| Anchoring on first variable resolved | MEDIUM | Bias cross-check Step 5 — test if different starting variable changes result |
-| No review date on reversible decisions | LOW | Two-way doors MUST include a review date — iterate, don't commit |
-
-## Done When
-
-- Reversibility classified (two-way / one-way / partial)
-- All variables identified and typed (controllable vs. fixed)
-- Dependency map documented (A constrains B, C influences D)
-- Variables evaluated in dependency order with running state block and confidence % at each step
-- Second-order effects checked (one-way door decisions)
-- Bias cross-check completed (anchoring, status quo, overconfidence)
-- Ambiguities listed with what information would resolve them
-- Final recommendation emitted with confidence level and review date
-- Sequential Analysis report in output format
-
-## Cost Profile
-
-~500-1500 tokens input, ~500-1200 tokens output. Sonnet for reasoning depth.
+---
+name: sequential-thinking
+description: "Step-by-step complex reasoning for multi-variable problems. Breaks interconnected decisions into ordered logical steps with bias detection, reversibility classification, and second-order effect tracking."
+metadata:
+  author: runedev
+  version: "0.3.0"
+  layer: L3
+  model: sonnet
+  group: reasoning
+  tools: "Read, Glob, Grep"
+---
+
+# sequential-thinking
+
+## Purpose
+
+Multi-variable analysis utility for decisions where factors are interdependent and order of reasoning matters. Receives a decision problem, classifies reversibility, detects cognitive biases, maps variable dependencies, processes them in dependency order, checks for second-order effects, and returns a structured decision tree with final recommendation. Stateless — no memory between calls.
+
+## Calls (outbound)
+
+None — pure L3 reasoning utility.
+
+## Called By (inbound)
+
+- `debug` (L2): multi-factor bugs with interacting causes
+- `plan` (L2): complex architecture with many trade-offs
+- `brainstorm` (L2): evaluating approaches with many variables
+
+## When to Use
+
+Invoke this skill when:
+- The decision has more than 3 interacting variables
+- Choosing option A changes what options are valid for B and C
+- Architecture decisions have cascading downstream effects
+- Trade-off analysis where constraints eliminate entire solution branches
+
+Do NOT use for simple linear analysis — `problem-solver` is more efficient for single-dimension reasoning.
+
+## Execution
+
+### Input
+
+```
+decision: string        — the decision or problem to analyze
+variables: string[]     — (optional) pre-identified factors; if omitted, skill identifies them
+constraints: string[]   — (optional) hard limits that eliminate options
+goal: string            — (optional) success criteria or desired outcome
+```
+
+### Step 0 — Reversibility Classification
+
+Before investing analytical effort, classify the decision:
+
+| Type | Definition | Analytical Effort |
+|------|-----------|-------------------|
+| **Two-way door** | Reversible, can iterate, low switching cost | Decide quickly, set review date. Light analysis. |
+| **One-way door** | Irreversible, high stakes, costly to reverse | Full sequential analysis. Deep reasoning. |
+| **Partially reversible** | Some aspects reversible, some not | Full analysis on irreversible aspects, light on reversible. |
+
+If two-way door → streamline: skip Step 4 (second-order) and Step 5 (bias cross-check). State reasoning.
+
+### Step 1 — Identify All Variables
+
+List every factor that affects the decision. For each variable, record:
+- Name and description
+- Possible values or range
+- Whether it is controllable (we can choose) or fixed (constraint from environment)
+
+If the caller provided `variables`, validate and expand the list. If omitted, derive from the decision statement.
+
+### Step 2 — Map Dependencies
+
+For each pair of variables, determine if a dependency exists:
+- `[A] constrains [B]`: choosing a value for A limits valid values for B
+- `[A] influences [B]`: A affects the cost/benefit calculation for B but does not eliminate options
+- `[A] independent of [B]`: no relationship
+
+Document dependencies as: `[Variable A] → [Variable B]: [type and reason]`
+
+Identify which variables have the most outbound dependencies — those must be resolved first.
+
+### Step 3 — Evaluate in Dependency Order
+
+Sort variables from most-constrained (fixed / most depended upon) to least-constrained (free / most flexible). Process in that order:
+
+For each variable in sequence:
+- State current known state of all previously resolved variables
+- Evaluate valid options given those constraints
+- Select the best option with explicit reasoning
+- Record the conclusion and how it affects downstream variables
+
+Do not jump ahead — each step must reference the conclusions of prior steps.
+
+**Running state block** at each step:
+
+```
+State after Step N:
+- [Variable A]: resolved to [value] because [reason]
+- [Variable B]: resolved to [value] because [reason]
+- Remaining: [Variable C], [Variable D]
+```
+
+### Step 4 — Second-Order Effects Check
+
+After all variables are resolved, apply second-order thinking:
+
+For each resolved variable, ask: **"And then what?"**
+
+| Variable | First-Order Effect | Second-Order Effect | Risk Level |
+|----------|-------------------|--------------------|-|
+| [A = value] | [immediate consequence] | [consequence of consequence] | low/medium/high |
+
+Flag any second-order effect that:
+- Contradicts the goal stated in the input
+- Creates a feedback loop (reinforcing or balancing)
+- Affects stakeholders not considered in the analysis
+- Would flip a previous variable's optimal value
+
+If a dangerous second-order effect is found → revisit the affected variable with this new information.
+
+### Step 5 — Bias Cross-Check
+
+Check the analysis for the 3 biases most dangerous to multi-variable decisions:
+
+| Bias | Detection Question | If Detected |
+|------|-------------------|-------------|
+| **Anchoring** | Did the first variable we resolved disproportionately constrain all others? Would the result differ if we started from a different variable? | Re-evaluate with a different starting variable. Compare results. |
+| **Status Quo** | Did we give an unfair advantage to "keep current approach" for any variable? Would we choose this if starting from scratch? | Evaluate current state with same rigor as alternatives. |
+| **Overconfidence** | How confident are we in each variable's resolution? Are confidence intervals wide enough? | Assign explicit confidence % to each resolution. Flag any > 90% without strong evidence. |
+
+If bias is detected → note it in the report and state whether it changes the recommendation.
+
+### Step 6 — Synthesize
+
+After all variables are resolved and cross-checked:
+- Combine all per-step conclusions into a coherent final recommendation
+- Identify any variables that remained ambiguous — state what additional information would resolve them
+- Assess overall confidence: `high` (all variables resolved cleanly), `medium` (1-2 ambiguous), `low` (major uncertainty remains)
+- Note the reversibility classification from Step 0 — if two-way door, include a review date
+
+### Step 7 — Report
+
+Return the full decision tree and recommendation in the output format below.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Never evaluate variable B before all variables that constrain B are resolved
+- If a dependency cycle is detected, flag it explicitly and break the cycle by treating one variable as a fixed assumption
+- Use Sonnet — reasoning depth and coherence across many steps matters
+- If more than 8 variables are identified, group related ones into composite variables to keep analysis tractable
+- MUST classify reversibility (Step 0) before investing analytical effort
+- MUST check for second-order effects on one-way door decisions
+- MUST run bias cross-check on one-way door decisions
+
+## Output Format
+
+```
+## Sequential Analysis: [Decision]
+
+### Reversibility: [two-way door / one-way door / partially reversible]
+[One sentence reasoning. If two-way: "Light analysis — decide quickly, review in [timeframe]."]
+
+### Variables Identified
+| Variable | Possible Values | Type |
+|----------|----------------|------|
+| [A]      | [options]      | controllable / fixed |
+| [B]      | [options]      | controllable / fixed |
+
+### Dependency Map
+- [A] → [B]: [type] — [reason]
+- [C] → [A]: [type] — [reason]
+
+### Step-by-Step Evaluation
+1. **[Variable A]** (no dependencies — evaluate first)
+   - Options: [x, y, z]
+   - Reasoning: [why one is better given constraints]
+   - Conclusion: **[chosen value]** (confidence: X%)
+   - State: { A: [value] }
+
+2. **[Variable B]** (depends on A = [value])
+   - Options remaining: [filtered list]
+   - Reasoning: [updated analysis given A's value]
+   - Conclusion: **[chosen value]** (confidence: X%)
+   - State: { A: [value], B: [value] }
+
+...
+
+### Second-Order Effects (one-way door only)
+| Variable | First-Order | Second-Order | Risk |
+|----------|------------|-------------|------|
+| [A] | [effect] | [and then what?] | low/medium/high |
+
+### Bias Check
+- ⚠️ [Bias]: [detection result] → [action taken or "not detected"]
+
+### Ambiguities
+- [variable or factor that could not be fully resolved, and what information would resolve it]
+
+### Final Recommendation
+[synthesized conclusion incorporating all resolved variables, with confidence level]
+
+- **Confidence**: high | medium | low
+- **Key assumption**: [the most critical assumption this recommendation depends on]
+- **Review date**: [when to revisit this decision, especially for two-way doors]
+```
+
+## Sharp Edges
+
+| Failure Mode | Severity | Mitigation |
+|---|---|---|
+| Evaluating variable B before all variables constraining B are resolved | CRITICAL | Dependency order is mandatory — sort by constraint depth first |
+| Dependency cycle detected but not flagged | HIGH | Break cycle by treating one variable as a fixed assumption — flag explicitly |
+| More than 8 variables without grouping | MEDIUM | Group related variables — keep tractable, not exhaustive |
+| Final recommendation missing confidence level | MEDIUM | Confidence (high/medium/low) is required — ambiguities drive confidence down |
+| Full analysis on a two-way door decision | MEDIUM | Step 0 classifies reversibility — two-way doors get light analysis |
+| Ignoring second-order effects on irreversible decisions | HIGH | Step 4 is mandatory for one-way doors — "and then what?" |
+| Anchoring on first variable resolved | MEDIUM | Bias cross-check Step 5 — test if different starting variable changes result |
+| No review date on reversible decisions | LOW | Two-way doors MUST include a review date — iterate, don't commit |
+
+## Done When
+
+- Reversibility classified (two-way / one-way / partial)
+- All variables identified and typed (controllable vs. fixed)
+- Dependency map documented (A constrains B, C influences D)
+- Variables evaluated in dependency order with running state block and confidence % at each step
+- Second-order effects checked (one-way door decisions)
+- Bias cross-check completed (anchoring, status quo, overconfidence)
+- Ambiguities listed with what information would resolve them
+- Final recommendation emitted with confidence level and review date
+- Sequential Analysis report in output format
+
+## Cost Profile
+
+~500-1500 tokens input, ~500-1200 tokens output. Sonnet for reasoning depth.