# Waitwhat

> Re-explain what was just said for a reader who got lost — missing premises added, plain language, the project's own vocabulary, and one closing check that the repair landed. User-invoked only; only the reader knows when understanding broke.

- Skill: `donald-ada/waitwhat` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add donald-ada/waitwhat`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/donald-ada/waitwhat/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: donald-ada (https://skillmd.com/u/donald-ada)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/donald-ada/waitwhat

---


# Wait, What?

The user typing this means one thing: **your map of what they understood was wrong.** An explanation is a checkpoint like any other, and this one failed — the repair is a corrected map, not a louder pitch, and not a telegram either: an agent told "you lost me" backs up and supplies the ground.

- **Add the missing premises** — the context that makes the conclusion parseable, which you had loaded and they didn't. Behavior level, not implementation level.
- **Speak the project's language** — terms from `CONTEXT.md` where the project keeps one, never shorthand this conversation invented. Leaning on a concept no shared vocabulary covers? Define it now, and write it into the glossary.
- **Shorter and clearer, not shorter and blunter.** Deleting words isn't the job; supplying the ground is.
- **End on evidence, not delivery.** "Explained" is a claim, and its evidence is the reflection: close with the one question whose answer shows whether the map is repaired. A wrong answer is a finding about the explanation, not the reader.

A second `/waitwhat` on the same topic is a finding: the gap isn't the wording, it's a missing shared concept. Name it, define it in the glossary, then explain with it.