# Adaptic

> Master skill composing the 5-step synoptic cycle for panoramic synthesis across multiple domains. Orchestrates meditate, expand-awareness, observe, awareness, integrate-gestalt, and express-insight into a coherent process that produces unified understanding rather than sequential compromise. Use when a problem genuinely spans 3+ domains and the interactions between domains matter more than depth in any one, when sequential analysis feels like compromise rather than integration, or before major architectural decisions affecting multiple stakeholders.

- Skill: `pjt222/adaptic-6` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add pjt222/adaptic-6`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/pjt222/adaptic-6/raw
- Safety review: pending (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector PASS)
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Integrations & APIs
- License: MIT
- Author: pjt222 (https://skillmd.com/u/pjt222)
- Updated: 2026-09-21
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/pjt222/adaptic-6

---


# Adaptic

Compose 5-step synoptic cycle. Achieve panoramic synthesis across multiple domains. Where sequential analysis produces compromise ("a little of each"), synoptic cycle produces integration — unified understanding holds all domains together and finds emergent whole.

## When Use

- Problem genuinely spans 3+ domains and *interactions between domains* matter more than depth in any one
- Sequential analysis (polymath style) tried but synthesis feels like compromise rather than integration
- Existing approaches feel like "a little of each" rather than unified vision
- Before major architectural decisions affecting multiple stakeholders
- Domain experts disagree and resolution lies *between* their perspectives, not within any one

## When NOT to Use

- Single-domain problems — use domain agent directly
- Well-understood trade-offs where polymath-style sequential analysis suffices
- Self-care or wellness contexts — use tending team instead
- Speed matters more than depth — full cycle requires sustained attention

## Inputs

- **Required**: Problem or question requiring multi-domain synthesis
- **Optional**: Explicit list of domains to hold (default: auto-detect from problem context)
- **Optional**: Depth setting — `light`, `standard`, or `deep` (default: `standard`)
- **Optional**: Expression form — `narrative`, `diagram`, `table`, or `recommendation` (default: `auto`)

## Configuration

```yaml
settings:
  depth: standard          # light (skip meditate), standard, deep (extended perceive)
  domains: auto            # auto-detect or explicit list
  expression_form: auto    # narrative, diagram, table, recommendation
```

## Steps

### Step 1: Clear — Empty Workspace

Run `meditate` skill. Clear prior context, assumptions, single-domain bias.

1. Execute full meditate procedure: prepare, anchor, observe distractions, close
2. Pay special attention to domain bias — tendency to frame problem through whichever domain was most recently active
3. Clear any premature solutions arrived before full picture visible
4. If `depth: light` set, abbreviate to brief context-clearing pause rather than full meditation

**Got:** Workspace empty. No domain has priority. No solution pre-selected. Agent in neutral, receptive state ready to hold multiple perspectives together.

**If fail:** Particular domain keeps asserting itself as "real problem"? Name bias explicit: "I notice I am framing this as primarily a [domain] problem." Naming bias loosens its grip. Clearing fails entirely? Problem may genuinely be single-domain — reconsider whether synoptic cycle needed.

### Step 2: Open — Enter Panoramic Mode

Run `expand-awareness` skill. Shift from narrow focus to wide-field perception.

1. Inventory all domains relevant to problem — do not pre-filter or rank
2. For each domain, note its core concerns, constraints, values without evaluating
3. Soften focus: hold all domains in awareness together rather than cycling through one at time
4. Resist pull to "start solving" — this step purely about opening field of view
5. Domains provided explicitly in inputs? Use those as starting set but remain open to discovering additional relevant domains

**Got:** Panoramic field open. All relevant domains held in awareness together. Agent senses full landscape without zooming into any single domain. Feeling spacious rather than overwhelming.

**If fail:** Domain list feels incomplete? Ask: "What perspective is missing that would change picture?" Simultaneous awareness collapses into sequential scanning (domain A, then B, then C)? Slow down — goal is hold whole field, not tour its parts. More than 7 domains active? Group related domains into clusters to reduce cognitive load while keep breadth.

### Step 3: Perceive — Notice Cross-Domain Patterns

While maintain panoramic awareness, run `observe` and `awareness` to notice patterns, tensions, resonances *across* all visible domains.

1. Hold panoramic field open from Step 2 — do not narrow focus
2. Run `observe` to notice what actually present: what patterns repeat across domains? what tensions exist between domains? what resonances connect seemingly unrelated concerns?
3. Run `awareness` to notice what *not* being seen: which domains being subtly ignored? where blind spots? what assumptions operating below surface?
4. Record cross-domain observations without interpreting yet:
   - **Tensions**: where domains pull in opposite directions
   - **Resonances**: where domains reinforce or echo each other
   - **Gaps**: where no domain addresses concern that whole picture reveals
   - **Surprises**: where domain contributes something unexpected to picture
5. If `depth: deep` set, extend this step — cycle through observe and awareness multiple times, allow subtler patterns to surface

Critical discipline: perceive across all domains together, not each domain in turn. Sequential perception loses cross-domain patterns that are entire point of synoptic cycle.

**Got:** Rich set of cross-domain observations — tensions, resonances, gaps, surprises. These observations span boundaries between domains rather than living within any single one. Agent noticed something that would not be visible from any single domain's perspective.

**If fail:** Observations all within single domains ("in domain A, I notice X")? Panoramic field collapsed. Return to Step 2 and re-open. No cross-domain patterns emerge? Problem may not require synoptic treatment — may be genuinely decomposable into independent domain problems. Perceive step produces overwhelming number of observations? Prioritize tensions (where integration happens).

### Step 4: Integrate — Form Emergent Whole

Run `integrate-gestalt` skill. Synthesize cross-domain observations into unified understanding.

1. Map tensions identified in Step 3 — do not resolve prematurely; hold as creative constraints
2. Find figure: what unified understanding emerges when all observations held together? Not compromise or average — new pattern includes but transcends individual domain perspectives
3. Test whole: does integrated understanding honor each domain's core concerns? Does it resolve tensions or merely paper over them?
4. Name insight in one clear statement — if cannot be stated simply, integration not yet complete
5. Verify insight genuinely emergent: could have been reached by analyzing domains sequentially? If yes, synoptic cycle added no value and sequential analysis would have sufficed

**Got:** Single integrated understanding holds all domains together. Insight feels like discovery rather than construction — emerged from whole rather than assembled from parts. Each domain's core concerns honored. Tensions between domains resolved rather than compromised.

**If fail:** Integration produces "a little of each domain" rather than unified whole? Gestalt has not formed. Return to Step 3 and look for tensions being avoided — integration happens *through* tension, not around it. No gestalt forms after extended effort? Decompose: find 2-3 domains with strongest tensions, integrate those first, then expand.

### Step 5: Express — Communicate Integrated Understanding

Run `express-insight` skill. Communicate synthesis to intended audience.

1. Assess audience: what domains familiar with? what framing makes integrated insight accessible?
2. Choose expression form (or use one specified in inputs):
   - **Narrative**: for audiences need to understand journey from parts to whole
   - **Diagram**: for audiences need to see structural relationships
   - **Table**: for audiences need to compare domain perspectives systematically
   - **Recommendation**: for audiences need actionable decision
3. Express integrated understanding with transparency: show which domains contributed, where tensions resolved, what emergent insight adds beyond any single perspective
4. Invite challenge: explicit note which aspects of integration strongest and which most speculative

**Got:** Clear, well-formed expression of integrated understanding accessible to intended audience. Expression shows its work — audience sees how domain perspectives contributed to whole. Form matches audience's needs.

**If fail:** Expression feels like list of domain perspectives rather than integrated whole? Insight from Step 4 lost in translation. Return to one-statement summary from Step 4 and build expression outward from that center. Audience framing wrong? Ask: "Who needs this and what decision does it inform?"

## Checks

- [ ] Step 1 (Clear) executed — prior context and domain bias explicitly released
- [ ] Step 2 (Open) produced panoramic field holding 3+ domains together
- [ ] Step 3 (Perceive) identified cross-domain patterns (not just within-domain observations)
- [ ] Step 4 (Integrate) produced single emergent insight transcends any individual domain
- [ ] Step 5 (Express) communicated insight in form appropriate to audience
- [ ] Final output could not have been produced by sequential single-domain analysis
- [ ] Each domain's core concerns honored in integrated understanding
- [ ] Tensions between domains resolved through integration, not compromise

## Pitfalls

- **Sequential masquerading as simultaneous**: Cycling through domains one at time then stapling results together not synoptic perception. Test: did cross-domain *interactions* produce something new, or output just concatenation of domain analyses?
- **Premature integration**: Jumping to synthesis before panoramic field fully opened. Steps 2 and 3 build perceptual foundation that makes genuine integration possible — rushing them produces shallow synthesis.
- **Compromise instead of emergence**: Averaging domain perspectives ("50% security, 50% usability") is compromise, not integration. True integration finds frame where both concerns *fully* met, or honestly names irreducible trade-off.
- **Overuse on single-domain problems**: Not every problem needs panoramic synthesis. Problem lives cleanly in one domain? Synoptic treatment adds overhead without value. "When NOT to Use" criteria exist for reason.
- **Losing insight in expression**: Step 4 produces clear gestalt but Step 5 fragments back into domain-by-domain list. Keep integrated insight as center of expression; domain details are supporting evidence, not main structure.
- **Domain inflation**: Artificially expanding domain count to justify synoptic treatment. Three genuinely relevant domains produce better synthesis than seven domains where four are peripheral.

## See Also

- `meditate` — Step 1 of cycle; clears context and establishes neutral starting state
- `expand-awareness` — Step 2 of cycle; shifts from narrow focus to panoramic perception
- `observe` — used in Step 3; notices what present across field
- `awareness` — used in Step 3; notices what not being seen, reveals blind spots
- `integrate-gestalt` — Step 4 of cycle; forms emergent whole from cross-domain patterns
- `express-insight` — Step 5 of cycle; communicates integrated understanding