newkayak12 Deep Thinking Workflow
4-step structured thinking process: diverge → decompose → challenge → converge.
When to Use / When Not to Use
| Use | Skip |
|---|---|
| Complex decision with multiple viable paths | Simple factual question |
| Problem needs reframing before solving | Already know what to do |
| Ideas exist but lack rigorous validation | Time-boxed quick answer needed |
Workflow Overview
[1] Diverge — Brainstorming
↓
[2] Decompose — First Principles
↓
[3] Challenge — Devil's Advocate
↓
[4] Converge — Decision Framework
Steps
Step 1 — Brainstorming
Skill: brainstorming
Goal: Generate maximum breadth of ideas — no filtering yet
Output: 10-20 raw ideas, grouped by theme
Skip if: Ideas already exist, just need evaluation
"Step 1 시작" 또는 "아이디어 발산부터 해줘"
Step 2 — First Principles Thinking
Skill: first-principles
Goal: Break the problem to its fundamentals, question every assumption
Input: Top ideas from Step 1 (or the core question directly)
Output: Root causes, broken-down components, assumption list
Skip if: Problem scope is already well-defined
"Step 2 시작" 또는 "first principles로 분해해줘"
Step 3 — Devil's Advocate
Skill: devils-advocate
Goal: Steel-man the strongest objections — expose where the idea breaks
Input: Best idea(s) from Steps 1-2
Output: 3 strongest counterarguments + core vulnerability + optional fix paths
Skip if: Decision is low-stakes or reversible
"Step 3 시작" 또는 "devil's advocate 돌려줘"
Step 4 — Converge (Decision Framework)
Goal: Evaluate the surviving options against explicit criteria, make a recommendation Input: Ideas, decomposition, and counterarguments from Steps 1-3 How:
- List the 2-4 options still standing after Step 3.
- Name 3-5 decision criteria and weight them (must-have vs. nice-to-have).
- Score each option per criterion; tally weighted scores.
- State the recommendation, the confidence level, and what would change the call. Output: Decision matrix, weighted recommendation, confidence level Skip if: Only one viable option remains after Step 3
"Step 4 시작" 또는 "옵션 비교해서 정리해줘"
State Tracking
어느 단계에 있는지 알려주면 바로 합류합니다:
- "Step 2부터" → first-principles 바로 시작
- "아이디어는 있어, 반론만 봐줘" → Step 3으로 직행
MCP Enhancement
- think-tool: Steps 2, 3 — 가정 분해와 반론 생성에서 사용
- sequential-thinking: 전체 흐름 — 각 단계 output이 다음 단계 input으로 이어지는 맥락 유지
- mcp-reasoner: Step 4 — 여러 옵션을 구조적으로 비교할 때
What Claude Does / What You Do
| Claude | You |
|---|---|
| Idea generation, framing, synthesis | Define the core question |
| Assumption breakdown, reframing | Validate assumptions against real context |
| Counterargument generation | Add domain knowledge I don't have |
| Decision matrix scoring | Make the final call |
Related Skills
think:brainstorming,think:first-principles,think:devils-advocate- Before: Use
think:problem-reframerif the question itself feels wrong - After: Feed decision output into
pm:pm-strategy-workflowordevelop:dev-quality-workflow thought-organizer— 워크플로 시작 전에 산발적 입력 재료를 구조화할 때problem-reframer— Step 1 발산 전에 문제 정의 자체가 올바른지 점검하고 싶을 때