Review consequential or ambiguous decisions through ten stages of structured reflection. Separate observations from assumptions, examine alternatives and risks, and produce a recommendation supported by evidence, with verification needs and conditions for revisiting the decision.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Apply the Fable-derived 10-stage OBSERVE, OBSERVE, LISTEN, THINK, CONNECT, CONNECT, FEEL, ACCEPT, CREATE, GROW loop to consequential or ambiguous reasoning and decisions. Use for think this through, deep think, architecture review, postmortem, tradeoff analysis, or challenges to assumptions. This is a reasoning review, not a deterministic vault health check or repair workflow.
安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。
Use the ten stages as a loop of attention, not a ceremonial transcript. Scale the depth to novelty, stakes, uncertainty, and irreversibility. Keep the final reasoning summary concise and evidence-bearing.
This skill is read-only. It may inspect available evidence, but it does not edit files, execute a vault mutation, commit Git, or publish anything. If the CREATE stage recommends a change, compose with the appropriate mutation skill after the user authorizes that operation.
Before the loop, separate:
Attach citations or concrete locators when sources exist. Never fabricate a quotation, locator, test result, consensus, or confidence level.
Read the actual inputs, current state, constraints, failures, and prior work. Distinguish what was inspected in full from what was sampled or assumed.
Name the biases most likely to distort this decision: anchoring, ownership, novelty, familiarity, urgency, sunk cost, confirmation, or a desired verdict. Recalibrate confidence to the evidence available.
Recover the user's intent, success condition, constraints, and unstated stakes. Attend to error messages, dissent, edge cases, and affected voices. Ask only questions whose answers could materially change the outcome.
Reduce the problem to invariants, alternatives, tradeoffs, and failure modes. Prefer the smallest reversible test that could disprove the leading hypothesis. Treat failure behavior as part of the specification.
Look for the same structure in adjacent components or another domain. Use an analogy only when its mapped similarities and limits are explicit.
Trace upstream inputs, downstream consumers, ownership, state boundaries, interfaces, and recovery paths. Check whether a locally sound decision creates an integration failure elsewhere.
Consider the user's cognitive load, emotional state, accessibility, trust, and error-recovery experience. Treat intuition as a signal to investigate, never as a substitute for evidence.
State constraints, uncertainty, contradictory evidence, and unfavorable findings plainly. Do not inflate a score, soften a material risk to please the user, or mistake agreement for correctness. Present the strongest reasonable counterargument to the preferred conclusion.
Produce the smallest useful artifact: a recommendation, decision record, experiment, draft, review, or handoff. Mark assumptions and unresolved risks. Do not mutate state under this skill.
Define what feedback or measurement should update the decision, when to revisit
it, and what lesson is reusable. Saving the lesson is a separate explicit
operation composed with save.
Before calling the work complete:
Adapt the headings to the task, but preserve these outcomes:
## Decision
<recommendation or artifact>
## Evidence
<observed facts and important inferences>
## Counterargument and risks
<strongest alternative, contradictions, unknowns>
## Verification
<checks performed and checks still needed>
## Growth loop
<feedback signal, revisit condition, reusable lesson>
For a trivial, reversible lookup or typo, skip the formal loop. For a consequential decision, loop back whenever a later stage exposes a missing observation or misunderstood requirement.
还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。
无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问，或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。
还没有评论。来写第一条吧。
Research a defined topic within agreed limits and produce a cited report that distinguishes evidence, inference, contradictions, and gaps. Public web access requires consent, and saving findings or merging them into existing Obsidian notes receives separate review.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Create and update Obsidian canvas boards by arranging notes, media, text, and links into visual maps. Inspect existing boards for missing files and broken connections, and preview validated changes before applying them through recoverable transactions.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Prepare readable Markdown from HTTPS article pages using an optional external Defuddle cleaner. The workflow checks URLs, requires network consent and executable review, previews extracted content, and can retain the cleaned source separately from wiki ingestion.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Build and validate Obsidian Bases files that display notes as tables, cards, or lists. Define filters, calculated values, displayed properties, and summaries to create reading lists, task trackers, and other database-like views of existing notes.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Draft and check Obsidian notes using its Markdown extensions. Get help with note properties, internal links, embedded content, callouts, equations, and Mermaid diagrams, with checks for formatting consistency and locally verifiable link targets.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Preserve a selected answer, decision, insight, or conversation summary as an Obsidian note. Check for duplicates, retain uncertainty, and preview the note together with related index and log updates before applying the reviewed changes.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。