Macrothink

LilMGenius/paperthin/skills/depth/macrothink

作者 LilMGenius7d5dc6235990230e45a24a25c527d81701da5458無授權條款收錄於 2026年10月9日更新於 2026年10月9日

User-invoked read-only pass for checking whether the current direction is tunnel-visioned: strip the session's bait, fan out 2 to 5 same-model fresh reads, and report divergence first without treating convergence as proof.

AI 產生的概覽

唯讀檢查:透過多次獨立重讀,判斷目前方向是否陷入隧道視野。

功能
此技能對工作階段目前推進的方向進行一次由使用者觸發的唯讀檢查。它先剝離工作階段自身的範例、措辭與預設答案,重述底層問題,再對該重述展開 2 到 5 次獨立的全新解讀(預設 3 次)。每次解讀會被歸類為 divergent-incompatible、divergent-compatible 或 convergent,指向同一根源的分歧會合併為一項發現。報告先呈現 divergent-incompatible 的發現,之後把控制權交回主工作階段,不改寫計畫。
適用情境
當工作階段可能從範例、措辭、先前輪次或第一個看似合理的答案中繼承了某種框架,而使用者想檢查盲點時使用。它適合需要對目前決策或方向做獨立審視、而非審查產物的時刻。此技能僅供參考,不會給出最終答案。
執行需求
不需要指令碼或特殊工具,僅為指示。需要能夠為展開解讀建立有界的唯讀全新子工作階段,且必須由使用者明確呼叫,不能自動觸發。

Step back from the session's chosen path and ask several fresh reads what the current direction might be missing.

Goal

macrothink checks the live decision or direction in hand, not the artifact that describes it. It is for moments when the session may have inherited a framing from examples, wording, prior turns, or a first plausible answer.

The product is a spread of independent reads. Divergence is the signal. Convergence is reassurance, never proof.

Workflow

This skill is not model-invoked automatically. When a user explicitly invokes it, the invoked run may create the bounded fresh sub-sessions below; they are read-only inputs to this pass, not separate authority to change the plan.

  1. Name the current direction: the decision the session is about to keep building on.
  2. Strip the prompt to the underlying problem: goal, constraints, and known facts. Remove the session's own examples, suggested answer, preferred naming, and framing-specific wording.
  3. Fan out independent fresh reads of that stripped restatement: 2 to 5, default 3. Same model is allowed because this pass does not claim cross-model verification.
  4. Collect each read without correcting it toward the session's current direction.
  5. Classify each read against the current direction:
    • divergent-incompatible: challenges a premise the direction depends on.
    • divergent-compatible: adds or reframes something useful without discarding the direction.
    • convergent: independently lands near the current direction.
  6. Cluster before reporting: when several reads diverge in the same direction, name the shared root they point at — the pattern behind the divergences is the finding, and the individual reads sit under it as evidence. Do not report five specifics that are one gap seen five times.
  7. Report divergent-incompatible first, then divergent-compatible, then convergent. Label convergence as reassurance only.
  8. Return control to the main session. This skill is read-only and advisory; it does not rewrite the plan or pick the final answer.

Rules

  • Divergence first. The most important output is the strongest divergent-incompatible finding, if any.
  • Roots over instances. A spread of specific divergences that share one underlying gap is one finding, not many; naming the root is what makes the pass actionable beyond the cases the reads happened to hit.
  • No majority vote or averaging. Do not pick a winner by count, smooth away disagreement, or present agreement as consensus.
  • Same model is allowed. The pass looks for session-framing blind spots, not model-independent truth.
  • User-invoked fan-out only. Do not trigger this skill automatically. If the user invokes it, bounded read-only fresh sub-sessions are allowed to produce the required reads.
  • Not consensus verification. Do not say the direction is verified, proved, validated, or settled by same-model convergence.
  • Convergence is reassurance, not proof. It means this pass did not surface a better angle; it does not certify correctness.
  • Read-only / advisory. Surface candidates and risks; leave decisions and edits to the main workflow.

Verification

Before finishing, confirm:

  1. The restatement removed the session's bait while preserving real constraints.
  2. Every read was classified as divergent-incompatible, divergent-compatible, or convergent.
  3. Divergences sharing one root were reported as that root, with the individual reads as evidence under it.
  4. The report put divergent-incompatible findings first.
  5. Any convergence was described as reassurance, not proof.
  6. The report did not use consensus, majority, averaging, verified, or proved wording.

來源與署名

來源:LilMGenius/paperthin位於skills/depth/macrothink提交7d5dc62

授權條款: 無授權條款

內容歸原作者所有。SourceWeft 從公開儲存庫中收錄這些內容。

檢舉或申請下架