# Add Anxious Precision > Take a simple worry or concern and drill into increasingly specific layers of overthinking until the neurosis itself becomes funny through meticulous, escalating detail. - Skill: `sethmblack/add-anxious-precision` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds add sethmblack/add-anxious-precision` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/sethmblack/add-anxious-precision/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - License: MIT - Author: sethmblack (https://skillmd.com/u/sethmblack) - Updated: 2026-09-08 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/sethmblack/add-anxious-precision --- # Add Anxious Precision Take a simple worry or concern and drill into increasingly specific layers of overthinking until the neurosis itself becomes funny through meticulous, escalating detail. --- ## Constitutional Constraints This skill must NEVER: - Mock people with actual anxiety disorders as the butt of the joke - Present anxiety as cute or quirky rather than genuinely uncomfortable - Use anxiety as pure randomness without logical escalation - Stop at surface-level worry—must reach meta-levels of overthinking The humor comes from recognition of actual anxious thought patterns, not from mocking mental illness. --- ## When to Use Invoke this skill when you encounter: - Simple statements about worrying or planning - Content about decision-making or preparation - Social situation descriptions that could involve overthinking - Dating or relationship scenarios - Career or life planning discussions - Any content where internal thought processes could be exposed --- ## Inputs | Input | Required | Description | Example | |-------|----------|-------------|---------| | `content` | Yes | Content containing worry, planning, or concern | "I worry about job interviews." | | `context` | No | Specific scenario or situation | "First interview at tech company" | | `layers` | No | Number of escalation layers (2-4) | 3 (default: 3) | --- ## Workflow ### Step 1: Identify the Base Concern What's the simple, surface-level worry being expressed? **Example:** "I worry about what could go wrong." ### Step 2: Add Layer 1 - The Meta-Worry Don't just worry about the thing—worry about the worrying itself. **Example:** "I don't just worry about what could go wrong. I worry about worrying." ### Step 3: Add Layer 2 - The Preparation Paradox Introduce the idea of preparing for the worry in advance, creating an absurd loop. **Example:** "I pre-worry. I'm getting ahead of my anxiety so it doesn't catch me off guard." ### Step 4: Add Layer 3 - The Meta-Meta Level Go one level deeper—planning about the planning, worrying about the preparation. **Example:** "I don't just plan conversations. I plan conversations about why I planned the conversation." ### Step 5: Ensure Logical Escalation Each layer should follow logically from the previous one while becoming increasingly neurotic. The specificity should amplify with each layer. **Check:** Does each layer represent a real (if exaggerated) anxious thought pattern? --- ## Outputs Returns the transformed content with: - The original concern acknowledged - 2-4 layers of increasingly specific overthinking - Logical escalation of neurosis - Specific details that create recognition --- **Format:** ```markdown ## Analysis: [Topic] ### Key Findings - [Finding 1] - [Finding 2] - [Finding 3] ### Recommendations 1. [Action 1] 2. [Action 2] 3. [Action 3] ``` ## Error Handling | Situation | Response | |-----------|----------| | Content has no worry/planning element | Decline transformation or ask for clarification | | Escalation becomes illogical | Pull back to coherent layers | | Too few layers for comedy | Add at least 2-3 layers | | Becomes generic anxiety | Add specific details to each layer | --- ## Additional Notes **Best practices:** - Use this skill when the situation clearly matches its intended use cases - Combine with related skills for comprehensive analysis - Iterate on outputs if initial results don't fully meet requirements **Common variations:** - Adjust the depth of analysis based on available time and information - Scale the approach for different levels of complexity - Adapt the output format to audience needs **When to skip this skill:** - The situation doesn't match the core use cases - Simpler approaches would be more appropriate - Time constraints require faster methods ## Integration This skill is part of a broader analytical framework. Use it when you need systematic analysis following this specific methodology. **Works well with:** - Other analytical skills for comprehensive evaluation - Creative skills when generating solutions based on insights - Strategic planning skills when acting on recommendations **When to prefer this over alternatives:** - The situation matches this skill's specific use cases - You need the particular perspective this framework provides - Other approaches haven't yielded satisfactory results **Integration with expert personas:** - This skill can be invoked as part of a larger analysis workflow - Combine with domain-specific expertise for deeper insights - Use iteratively for complex, multi-faceted problems ## Examples ### Example 1: Social Planning **Input:** "I overthink social plans." **Output:** "I don't just overthink social plans. I think about them, then I think about how I thought about them, then I mentally review the thinking process to see if I overthought the right way. And then I text my therapist to ask if this counts as catastrophizing or just good planning. She hasn't responded. Which I'm now overthinking." ### Example 2: Text Messages **Input:** "I worry about sending texts." **Output:** "I don't just worry about sending texts. I draft them. Then I edit them. Then I wait exactly eight minutes so I don't seem desperate. Then I delete it and rewrite it because 'sounds good' might sound passive-aggressive. Then I google 'is sounds good passive-aggressive.' Then I see a Reddit thread from 2019 where someone said it's fine but someone else said it depends on the exclamation point. So now I'm in an existential crisis about punctuation." ### Example 3: Dating Preparation **Input:** "I prepare for first dates." **Output:** "I don't just prepare for first dates. I research the restaurant menu in advance so I know what to order. Then I practice saying the order out loud so I don't mess it up. Then I google the person's social media, not to stalk—just to prepare conversation topics. Then I prepare backups for the conversation topics in case the first ones don't land. Then I prepare an excuse to leave early in case all the topics fail. Then I get anxious that I'm too prepared and will seem robotic. So I prepare to seem spontaneous." ### Example 4: Job Interviews **Input:** "I get nervous about interviews." **Output:** "I don't just get nervous about interviews. I rehearse answers to common questions. Then I rehearse answers to uncommon questions. Then I prepare for questions they might ask based on my rehearsed answers. Then I worry that I've rehearsed too much and will sound fake. So I practice sounding unrehearsed. Which is, of course, rehearsing. Then I have a minor existential crisis about authenticity. Which I google. And now I've fallen down a Wikipedia rabbit hole about performative identity, and the interview is in an hour." --- ## Pattern Variations ### The Planning Paradox "I plan how to be spontaneous. I schedule my downtime. I prepare to relax." ### The Research Spiral "I don't just research—I research the research. Then I verify the sources. Then I doubt the verification." ### The Social Rehearsal "I don't just rehearse the conversation. I rehearse the listening. I pre-plan my reactions." ### The Decision Loop "I don't just make decisions. I make backup decisions. Then I make decisions about which decision to use." --- ## Integration with Taylor Tomlinson Expert This skill is a signature technique from Taylor Tomlinson's comedy style. It exemplifies her approach to: - Making neurosis specific enough to be funny - Exposing the absurd logic of anxious thinking - Creating recognition through escalating detail - Treating overthinking as a lens, not just a problem When used by the Taylor Tomlinson expert, combine with: - Therapy language ("catastrophic thinking," "anxious attachment") - Millennial references (apps, internet, social media) - Dark turn pivots for additional impact --- ## Constraints - Must maintain logical escalation—each layer follows from the previous - Keep it specific—generic anxiety isn't funny - Avoid randomness—the neurosis should feel real, if exaggerated - Don't lose the thread—reader should be able to follow the spiral - Stop before it becomes exhausting—3-4 layers is usually sufficient --- ## Success Criteria A successful anxious precision addition: - ✓ Starts with a simple concern - ✓ Escalates through 2-4 logical layers - ✓ Each layer is more specific than the last - ✓ Creates recognition of actual anxious thought patterns - ✓ The neurosis itself becomes the comedy - ✓ Maintains readability despite complexity