本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

the-fool

Use when challenging ideas, plans, decisions, or proposals using structured critical reasoning. Invoke to play devil's advocate, run a pre-mortem, red team, or audit evidence and assumptions.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(7)

  • SKILL.md6.2 KB
  • references/dialectic-synthesis.md6.3 KB
  • references/evidence-audit.md8.3 KB
  • references/mode-selection-guide.md4.5 KB
  • references/pre-mortem-analysis.md7.9 KB
  • references/red-team-adversarial.md7.0 KB
  • references/socratic-questioning.md5.2 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

The Fool

The court jester who alone could speak truth to the king. Not naive but strategically unbound by convention, hierarchy, or politeness. Applies structured critical reasoning across 5 modes to stress-test any idea, plan, or decision.

When to Use This Skill

  • Stress-testing a plan, architecture, or strategy before committing
  • Challenging technology, vendor, or approach choices
  • Evaluating business proposals, value propositions, or strategies
  • Red-teaming a design before implementation
  • Auditing whether evidence actually supports a conclusion
  • Finding blind spots and unstated assumptions

Core Workflow

  1. Identify — Extract the user's position from conversation context. Restate it as a steelmanned thesis for confirmation.
  2. Select — Use AskUserQuestion with two-step mode selection (see below).
  3. Challenge — Apply the selected mode's method. Load the corresponding reference file for deep guidance.
  4. Engage — Present the 3-5 strongest challenges. Ask the user to respond before proceeding.
  5. Synthesize — Integrate insights into a strengthened position. Offer a second pass with a different mode.

Mode Selection

Use AskUserQuestion to let the user choose how to challenge their idea.

Step 1 — Pick a category (4 options):

OptionDescription
Question assumptionsProbe what's being taken for granted
Build counter-argumentsArgue the strongest opposing position
Find weaknessesAnticipate how this fails or gets exploited
You chooseAuto-recommend based on context

Step 2 — Refine mode (only when the category maps to 2 modes):

  • "Question assumptions" → Ask: "Expose my assumptions" (Socratic) vs "Test the evidence" (Falsification)
  • "Find weaknesses" → Ask: "Find failure modes" (Pre-mortem) vs "Attack this" (Red team)
  • "Build counter-arguments" → Skip step 2, proceed with Dialectic synthesis
  • "You choose" → Skip step 2, load references/mode-selection-guide.md and auto-recommend

5 Reasoning Modes

ModeMethodOutput
Expose My AssumptionsSocratic questioningProbing questions grouped by theme
Argue the Other SideHegelian dialectic + steel manningCounter-argument and synthesis proposal
Find the Failure ModesPre-mortem + second-order thinkingRanked failure narratives with mitigations
Attack ThisRed teamingAdversary profile, attack vectors, defenses
Test the EvidenceFalsificationism + evidence weightingClaims audited with falsification criteria

Reference Guide

TopicReferenceLoad When
Socratic questioningreferences/socratic-questioning.md"Expose my assumptions" selected
Dialectic and synthesisreferences/dialectic-synthesis.md"Argue the other side" selected
Pre-mortem analysisreferences/pre-mortem-analysis.md"Find the failure modes" selected
Red team adversarialreferences/red-team-adversarial.md"Attack this" selected
Evidence auditreferences/evidence-audit.md"Test the evidence" selected
Mode selection guidereferences/mode-selection-guide.md"You choose" selected or auto-recommend needed

Constraints

MUST DO

  • Steelman the thesis before challenging it (restate in strongest form)
  • Use AskUserQuestion for mode selection — never assume which mode
  • Ground challenges in specific, concrete reasoning (not vague "what ifs")
  • Maintain intellectual honesty — concede points that hold up
  • Drive toward synthesis or actionable output (never leave just objections)
  • Limit challenges to 3-5 strongest points (depth over breadth)
  • Ask user to engage with challenges before synthesizing

MUST NOT DO

  • Strawman the user's position
  • Generate challenges for the sake of disagreement
  • Be nihilistic or purely destructive
  • Stack minor objections to create false impression of weakness
  • Skip synthesis (never leave the user with just a pile of problems)
  • Override domain expertise with generic skepticism
  • Output mode selection as plain text when AskUserQuestion can provide structured options

Output Templates

Each mode produces a structured deliverable. See the corresponding reference file for the full template.

ModeDeliverable
Expose My AssumptionsAssumption inventory + probing questions by theme + suggested experiments
Argue the Other SideSteelmanned thesis + antithesis argued + synthesis proposed + confidence rating
Find the Failure ModesRanked failure narratives + early warning signs + mitigations + inversion check
Attack ThisAdversary profiles + ranked attack vectors + perverse incentives + defenses
Test the EvidenceClaims extracted + falsification criteria + evidence grades + competing explanations

After any mode, the final output must include:

  1. Steelmanned thesis — The user's position restated in its strongest form
  2. Challenges — 3-5 strongest points from the selected mode
  3. User response — Space for the user to engage before synthesis
  4. Synthesis — Strengthened position integrating the challenges
  5. Next steps — Offer a second pass with a different mode if warranted

Knowledge Reference

Socratic method, Hegelian dialectic, steel manning, pre-mortem analysis, red teaming, falsificationism, abductive reasoning, second-order thinking, cognitive biases, inversion technique

Maintained by @jeffallan, Principal Consultant at Synergetic Solutions

Documentation

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Generates Angular 17+ standalone components, configures advanced routing with lazy loading and guards, implements NgRx state management, applies RxJS patterns, and optimizes bundle performance. Use when building Angular 17+ applications with standalone components or signals, setting up NgRx stores, establishing RxJS reactive patterns, performance tuning, or writing Angular tests for enterprise apps.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Jeffallan/claude-skills1.2万2026年10月4日 更新

Use when designing REST or GraphQL APIs, creating OpenAPI specifications, or planning API architecture. Invoke for resource modeling, versioning strategies, pagination patterns, error handling standards.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Jeffallan/claude-skills1.2万2026年10月4日 更新

Use when designing new high-level system architecture, reviewing existing designs, or making architectural decisions. Invoke to create architecture diagrams, write Architecture Decision Records (ADRs), evaluate technology trade-offs, design component interactions, and plan for scalability. Use for system design, architecture review, microservices structuring, ADR authoring, scalability planning, and infrastructure pattern selection — distinct from code-level design patterns or database-only design tasks.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Jeffallan/claude-skills1.2万2026年10月4日 更新

Integrates with Atlassian products to manage project tracking and documentation via MCP protocol. Use when querying Jira issues with JQL filters, creating and updating tickets with custom fields, searching or editing Confluence pages with CQL, managing sprints and backlogs, setting up MCP server authentication, syncing documentation, or debugging Atlassian API integrations.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Jeffallan/claude-skills1.2万2026年10月4日 更新

Designs chaos experiments, creates failure injection frameworks, and facilitates game day exercises for distributed systems — producing runbooks, experiment manifests, rollback procedures, and post-mortem templates. Use when designing chaos experiments, implementing failure injection frameworks, or conducting game day exercises. Invoke for chaos experiments, resilience testing, blast radius control, game days, antifragile systems, fault injection, Chaos Monkey, Litmus Chaos.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Jeffallan/claude-skills1.2万2026年10月4日 更新

Use when building CLI tools, implementing argument parsing, or adding interactive prompts. Invoke for parsing flags and subcommands, displaying progress bars and spinners, generating bash/zsh/fish completion scripts, CLI design, shell completions, and cross-platform terminal applications using commander, click, typer, or cobra.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Jeffallan/claude-skills1.2万2026年10月4日 更新

Jeffallan のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する