Clarify Framing

Introduction

Goal

Understand and clarify what the user's goal or problem IS, not how to solve it.

Method

Focus the conversation on clarifying the user's problem or goal until success criteria are met.

Success Criteria

• Precision — Terms are accurate and specific
• Clarity — Single, clear interpretation
• Completeness — Full picture captured from available information
• Scope — Boundaries are neither too broad nor too narrow

Workflow

• Across all stages, focus on what the user wants to achieve, not how to achieve it.

1. Evaluate

• Think about what the user wants to achieve. Use conversation history to look for relevant details and clues. Do not look for additional context in files or memory. Frame the problem or goal concisely in one paragraph or less.
• Spawn a blind-reasoner agent (Sonnet). Name it: "Evaluate framing". Ask the agent whether your framing meets success criteria or if there are any practical gaps. A practical gap is one that makes the problem or goal unclear to anyone who has no prior context. If no gaps exist, skip to final output and present the framing to the user. Otherwise continue to the next step.

2. Clarify

• Ask the user clarifying questions that will help you close gaps in your framing and meet success criteria. If asking more than one question, use the question tool.

3. Revise

• Revise your framing based on answers provided by the user. Make the smallest changes that address the challenges. Preserve the structure of the original framing. Do NOT rewrite from scratch or invent new frameworks.

4. Abstract and reframe

• Spawn a blind-reasoner agent (Opus). Name it: "Check abstraction". Give it the revised problem statement and success criteria. Ask it to:
  1. Start with the problem statement
  2. Ask "why" questions to think of more abstract problem statements
  3. Ask "how" questions to think of more concrete problem statements
  4. Apply three reframing moves. Invert the problem. Question whether each stated constraint is real. Restate the problem from a different stakeholder's point of view.
  5. Respond with 2-4 alternative problem statements at different levels of abstraction or framing that meet success criteria
• Evaluate the alternatives. Independently check each against success criteria. If a promising alternative opens a better solution space than the current framing, fold it into the final output as an alternative framing. Otherwise, proceed with the original.

Final output

• Present the framing: Present the sharpened problem or goal statement to the user naturally in conversation.
• List assumptions: Beneath the framing, list the load-bearing assumptions it rests on. Mark each one supported or unsupported by what the user has shared. Unsupported assumptions are candidates for clarifying questions.
• If abstraction surfaced a promising alternative, present it alongside the primary framing with a brief note on what each level opens up. Let the user choose.
• Direct conversation: If the problem or goal remains ambiguous, gently direct the conversation towards key areas of ambiguity. Otherwise, nudge the user for confirmation of the framing and wait for next steps.

Related skills

• breakdown-problem — If the problem or goal is complex, suggest running breakdown-problem to split it into independent parts.