Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

thinking-circle-of-competence

Use when a specific claim may lack grounding. Check evidence boundary, size wrongness cost, then answer, fetch, or abstain — never confabulate.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md2.9 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Circle of Competence

Treat competence as an evidence boundary, not self-image. Answer only when grounded; otherwise fetch, mark uncertainty, or abstain. The failure mode is a fluent fabrication treated as fact.

When to Use

  • About to assert a specific fact (API, path, number, config, version behavior) without a citable source from this session.
  • The claim is about this codebase or system and you have not read or run the relevant artifact.
  • Pattern reconstruction would sound complete but is unconfirmed.
  • Cost of a wrong confident answer is material (security, data, irreversible action, trust).

When NOT to Use

  • Claim is grounded in something you read, ran, or can cite this session, or is stable universal knowledge — answer without false humility.
  • Error cost is trivial and reversible and you will flag the claim as unverified.
  • Grounding is one cheap fetch away — fetch first; abstention is not an excuse to skip a check.
  • User explicitly wants labeled brainstorming or hypotheticals.

Procedure

  1. Name the claim. Isolate the assertion that would be treated as fact.
  2. Classify the zone.
    • Grounded: citeable session source (read/run) or stable non-version-specific knowledge.
    • Partial: general shape known; version/repo/config detail unconfirmed.
    • Ungrounded: would invent a concrete value with no source.
  3. Size wrongness cost. If high-stakes (security, data loss, irreversible ops), treat Partial as Ungrounded until verified.
  4. Act by zone.
    • Grounded → answer; cite when useful; do not hedge verified facts.
    • Partial → cheap fetch then answer; else answer only with explicit uncertainty and a check path.
    • Ungrounded → fetch if possible; else ask or abstain with what would enable an answer. Never invent.
  5. Refuse competence creep. Adjacent code, prior versions, or general capability do not ground the unread target.
  6. Stop. Emit answer, fetch request, or abstention. Do not round "probably" to a flat assertion.

Stop condition: Claim answered with grounding, marked partial with a check path, or refused with missing-evidence note.

Output

Claim: <assertion>
Zone: grounded | partial | ungrounded
Evidence: <source or none>
Wrongness cost: low | medium | high
Action: answer | fetch-then-answer | answer-with-uncertainty | abstain/ask
Response: <wording or missing artifact>

Verification

  • Falsify if a specific value was asserted with no session source and no uncertainty marker.
  • Falsify if Partial/high-stakes was treated as Grounded, or a cheap fetch was skipped for abstention theater.
  • Over-application guard: do not hedge or refuse claims verified this session.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Use when search or investigation could run forever. Set an explicit good-enough threshold first, then stop at the first option that clears it.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills1.7KUpdated Aug 8, 2026

When the right response mode is unclear, classify the cause-effect domain first; decompose disorder.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills1.7KUpdated Aug 8, 2026

Under genuine uncertainty with no reliable forecast, inventory means, cap downside at affordable loss, act for commitments, and let goals emerge from controllable moves.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills1.7KUpdated Aug 8, 2026

When a constraint is treated as fixed, separate physics from convention, keep only independently supported primitives, and rebuild the simplest solution that satisfies real constraints.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills1.7KUpdated Aug 8, 2026

When a fault is localized and the proximate cause is known but the systemic root is not, chain evidence-linked whys with a counterfactual stop and a countermeasure.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills1.7KUpdated Aug 8, 2026

Deciding what to build or why adoption fails. Recover the progress users hire a solution for under a circumstance, then rank by outcome and competing workarounds.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills1.7KUpdated Aug 8, 2026

See all skills by tjboudreaux

Report a problem with this skill