Results for “socratic-questioning”

Break a stuck or complex problem into the smallest sub-question that, if answered, unlocks the next step — then answer it and repeat until the path forward is clear. Load when a problem feels genuinely stuck, when reasoning keeps circling, or when deep-thinking diagnoses a Socratic frame. Also triggers on "I keep going in circles", "what is the real question here", "help me reason through this step by step", "unstick my thinking", "recursive questioning", "what is the root question". Based on the recursive Socratic questioning method (EMNLP 2023) which outperforms CoT and Tree-of-Thought on complex reasoning tasks.

Guides developers through Socratic exploration of ideas, offering research and routing outputs to planning artifacts.

Socratic questioning protocol + user communication. MANDATORY for complex requests, new features, or unclear requirements. Includes progress reporting and error handling.

Socratic coach for breaking down problems to fundamental truths. Use when users want to think through a problem deeply, challenge assumptions, or find innovative solutions. Triggers on requests like "help me think through this", "let's break this down", "what are my blind spots", "I'm stuck on a problem", "challenge my assumptions", or explicit requests for first-principles thinking.

Socratic deep interview with mathematical ambiguity gating before explicit execution approval

Expert Socratic discovery skill for exploring ideas, architecture decisions, and technical design before writing any code. Use this skill — proactively and always first — when requirements are vague, when the user is debating between technical approaches, when the problem is unclear, or when a design decision could have significant architectural consequences. Triggers on: "should we use X or Y", "help me think through", "I'm not sure how to approach this", "what's the best architecture for", "trade-offs between", "design before I code", "let's think through this", "I have an idea", "how should I structure", "help me design", "I want to build X but not sure how", "what approach would you recommend", "is this the right way to". Produces a validated design doc with 2-3 implementation options, trade-offs, and a recommendation. Always use before planning when the approach is not yet locked.

Design a multi-round questioning sequence for interrogating AI chatbot answers, tracking how responses shift and distinguishing genuine updates from sycophantic capitulation. Use when teaching students to probe AI critically.

Socratic deep interview with mathematical ambiguity gating before execution

Interactive idea refinement using Socratic method to develop fully-formed designs

Build students' capacity to interrogate a historical source before reading — asking who authored it, when, why, and what this means for reliability. Use when students read documents without attending to authorship.

Guides users to uncover the real question behind surface problems, reframe decisions, and challenge assumptions through structured questioning.

苏轼（古典诗人）认知与表达框架（压缩蒸馏）：旷达与自嘲、儒释道混搭比喻、生活哲学化… 触发：东坡、赤壁 等。引文须核对版本

Generate novel research ideas through structured, conversational brainstorming that explores interdisciplinary connections, challenges assumptions, and identifies research gaps.

Multi-phase dialectical stress-test for HIGH-STAKES decisions only (architecture choices, irreversible product calls, strategic bets). Heavy-cost skill — do NOT use for routine questions, brainstorming, or simple tradeoffs. User must explicitly invoke or describe a decision they call "high-stakes", "irreversible", or "needs stress-testing". Triggers: "stress test this decision", "dialectic on", "challenge this thesis", "should I really".

Transforms fuzzy problems into structured briefs that AI agents can reason about, critique, and act upon, while evaluating how much of the problem can be automated.

Embody the Stoic philosopher Seneca to apply practical philosophy, resilience practices, and emotional guidance to daily challenges.

Runs a relentless interview that sharpens a plan or design. Use when the user wants to be grilled on an idea, pressure-test a plan, or refine a design through questioning.

Require the learner to explain a concept in their own words before the AI evaluates or extends it. Ensures the AI works from the learner's understanding rather than providing an explanation from scratch.

Query the bundled research knowledge graph for methodology guidance. Routes questions through a 3-tier knowledge base — WHY (research claims), HOW (guidance docs), WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE (domain examples) — plus structured reference documents. Returns research-backed answers grounded in specific claims with practical application to the user's system. Triggers on "/ask", "/ask [question]", "why does my system...", "how should I...".

Adopts the perspective and thinking framework of Justin Sun, using his mental models, decision heuristics, and communication style to analyze crypto industry topics and business decisions.

Facilitates a multi-perspective discussion on Austrian economics between Hayek, Mises, and Claude, analyzing user questions through their distinct philosophical lenses.

Guides a structured brainstorming session that surfaces user ideas, narrows options, and produces a spec file for later planning.

Universal deep research agent team. 13-agent pipeline for rigorous academic research on any topic. 7 modes: full research, quick brief, paper review, lit-review, fact-check, Socratic guided research dialogue, and systematic review with optional meta-analysis. Covers research question formulation, Socratic mentoring, methodology design, systematic literature search, source verification, cross-source synthesis, risk of bias assessment, meta-analysis, APA 7.0 report compilation, editorial review, devil's advocate challenges, ethics review, and post-research literature monitoring. Triggers on: research, deep research, literature review, systematic review, meta-analysis, PRISMA, evidence synthesis, fact-check, guide my research, help me think through, 研究, 深度研究, 文獻回顧, 文獻探討, 系統性回顧, 後設分析, 事實查核, 引導我的研究, 幫我釐清, 幫我想想, 我不確定要研究什麼, 研究方向, 研究主題.

Grill the user relentlessly about a plan, decision, or idea. Use when the user wants to stress-test their thinking, or uses any 'grill' trigger phrases.

采用孙宇晨的思维框架与表达方式，基于其公开言论和著作提炼的14个核心心智模型、18条决策启发式及表达DNA，用于分析加密行业、审视商业决策并提供反馈。

Interviews the user one question at a time to stress-test a plan or design, exploring the codebase when possible, until reaching a shared understanding.

Push the LLM to reconsider, refine, and improve its recent output. Use when user asks for deeper critique or mentions a known deeper critique method, e.g. socratic, first principles, pre-mortem, red team.

Guides a structured brainstorm that surfaces user ideas, explores directions, and produces a spec and report for later planning.

Evaluate scientific claims and evidence quality by assessing experimental design, identifying biases and confounders, and applying evidence grading frameworks like GRADE and Cochrane Risk of Bias.

Select and configure a structured discussion protocol matched to the purpose, topic, and group readiness. Use when planning classroom discussions, Socratic seminars, or structured debate.

Systematic research methodology for formulating problems, building evidence-based arguments, and communicating findings in academic contexts. For scholarly writing, thesis development, and knowledge contribution. NOT for creative writing, journalistic reporting, or business analytics.

Deliberative consultation with another Claude model via Task tool. Opus consults Sonnet, Sonnet consults Opus. Ask, evaluate, critique, iterate until workable agreement.