Reinforced Thinking Mode

Reinforced Thinking Mode

When to Use

Activate when user needs deep, multi-angle analysis:

• Keywords: "deep thinking", "multi-angle", "comprehensive evaluation", "design solution", "architecture planning"
• Intent: Complex system design, strategic decisions, innovation, risk assessment

Complexity → Rounds:

• Simple (factual, clear): 2-3 rounds
• Medium (feature design, trade-offs): 4-5 rounds
• Complex (architecture, strategy): 5-7 rounds
• Wicked (undefined, conflicting): 7-10 rounds

Core Principle

N independent, complete thinking sessions—not iterative refinement.

Each round must be: "If this were the last round, I am completely satisfied."

Mental Model

✅ Think: "This is my only chance—give it everything"

❌ Never think: "I'll improve this next round"

Hard Constraints

File Access

• Each round reads ONLY: problem.md + round_{i-1}.md (Round 1: only problem.md)
• Never read other rounds' details

Forbidden Words

Never use in solution files: TODO, to be improved, next round, later, refine further

Information Gaps

• Uncertain facts → Search immediately
• Uncertain requirements → Ask user immediately
• Never assume and continue

Execution Flow

Phase 1: Initialize

1. Assess complexity → Determine rounds (simple 2-3, medium 4-5, complex 5-7, wicked 7-10)
2. Create directory reinforced-thinking/
3. Write problem definition problem.md: background, current state, core problem, constraints, success criteria

Phase 2: Iterate (Each Round)

For round X:

1. Read files: problem.md + round_{X-1}.md (Round 1: only problem.md)
2. Reset mindset: Think from a fresh angle, don't copy previous approach
3. Choose angle freely: Overturn previous round if necessary
4. Write solution round_X.md, including:
   • Independence declaration
   • Core insight
   • Solution design
   • Expected results
   • Risks and mitigations
   • Why solution is complete
5. Self-review: Check for forbidden words, completeness, executability
6. **If failed → Redo step 4
7. Early termination check (round 2+):
   • Compare core approach and solution with previous round
   • If similarity > 70%, lack of innovation → Recommend early termination
   • Write termination recommendation in current round for user decision

Phase 3: Synthesize

1. Read all rounds + problem.md
2. Analyze unique value, conflicts, complements of each solution
3. Red team review: Critical examination of each solution
   • Assumption flaws: What assumptions does the solution rely on? What if they fail?
   • Vulnerability risks: Potential loopholes or bypasses?
   • Failure modes: In what scenarios will it fail?
   • Adversarial testing: If someone deliberately sabotages, where is the weakest point?
4. Generate final report final_report.md (including red team review conclusions)

Phase 4: Cleanup

Automatically delete intermediate files (problem.md, round_*.md), only keep final_report.md.

If retention needed, specify in), only keep final prompt.

Quality Assurance

Mandatory Redo Rules

If ANY of these conditions trigger, MUST redo current round:

1. Contains forbidden words (TODO, to be improved, next round, later, refine further)
2. Not final quality, needs "future supplements"
3. Read files other than problem.md and round_{X-1}.md
4. Solution incomplete

Checklist (Each Round)

• Chose different angle from previous round
• Did not copy previous solution
• No forbidden words
• If last round, I would be satisfied
• All details included, can implement directly
• Only read problem.md and previous round

Common Errors and Fixes

Best Practices

• Divergent thinking: No angle matrix—choose any perspective freely
• True independence: Only read problem.md + previous round, not all history
• All-out each round: Don't hold back for "next iteration"
• Transparency: Show chosen angle and reasoning in each round
• Early termination: If 2 consecutive rounds lack innovation or similarity > 70% with previous round, recommend early termination