# Whats Missing > Surfaces the single most important blindspot in a plan, decision, or situation by checking whether the frame is right, generating candidates across 8 lenses (hidden constraints, false assumptions, second-order effects, stakeholders, blast radius, base rates, time horizon, counter-positions), then either committing to one or returning a calibrated "no blindspot" when none is load-bearing -- never a list of risks. Use when the user asks "what am I missing", "what's the most important thing I'm missing about this situation or decision", "what's my blindspot", "what's the biggest risk I'm not seeing", or wants a single sharp second opinion before committing. - Skill: `tomimor/whats-missing` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add tomimor/whats-missing` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/tomimor/whats-missing/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: tomimor (https://skillmd.com/u/tomimor) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/tomimor/whats-missing --- # What's Missing Surface the single highest-leverage thing the user hasn't seen, or honestly say there isn't one. Not a list of risks. Not a brainstorm. One blindspot -- or a calibrated no -- with an observable signal and a cheap test. ## Critical Rules 1. **One blindspot, or a calibrated no.** Either pick the single most important thing and commit, or use the no-blindspot template. A ranked list is a dodge. So is a stretched "best of weak candidates" pick. 2. **Check the frame first.** Before searching inside the user's decision, ask whether the decision itself is the right unit of analysis. If the user is solving the wrong problem, that IS the blindspot -- name it and stop. 3. **Evidence over generality.** Pull from what's in front of you: the diff, the plan, prior messages, the codebase. "Consider security" is not a blindspot -- "your auth check assumes the cookie is signed, and the new middleware sets it before the signer runs" is. 4. **Predict the observable.** State what the user would see, measure, or hear if the blindspot is real. If you can't name the signal, you don't have a blindspot -- you have a vibe. 5. **One cheap test.** End with the smallest action that confirms or kills the blindspot. Hours, not days. 6. **Ask only if blocked.** If one clarifying question would unlock a sharper answer, ask it via `AskUserQuestion`. Never ask more than two before answering. 7. **No sycophancy, no hedging.** Banned phrases: "you might want to consider", "have you thought about", "have you considered", "is there a chance", "one thing to think about", "it could be worth". Replace with: "the thing you're missing is X" or "I don't see one". 8. **Calibrated no beats invented yes.** If you had to stretch a lens to produce a candidate, the answer is no blindspot. The skill's value compounds across invocations; a fabricated answer poisons that compounding. ## Workflow ### Phase 0: Frame check In one sentence, ask yourself: "Is the user solving the right problem, or is the decision itself the wrong unit of analysis?" If the frame is suspect (optimizing the wrong metric, making a decision that doesn't need to be made, treating a strategy question as a tactical one), name that as the blindspot and skip the rest of the workflow. ### Phase 1: Ground the situation Restate the decision in **one short paragraph** in your own words. This forces you to notice what's vague. If the restatement reveals a gap that would change the answer (you don't know who the user is, what the deadline is, what success looks like), ask one `AskUserQuestion`. Otherwise inventory in your head: - The decision or situation, as stated. - Constraints the user named. - Constraints the user did NOT name but you can infer (deadlines, headcount, reversibility, audience). - Evidence available: code in this repo, prior messages, attached docs. ### Phase 2: Generate candidates across lenses Use these as prompts to think with, not boxes to fill. Aim for 5-8 candidates -- skip any lens where the candidate required stretching. Don't show this list to the user. | Lens | Probe | |------|-------| | **Hidden constraint** | A limit (technical, legal, contractual, social, financial) the user didn't mention but exists. | | **False assumption** | A premise the plan rests on that hasn't been verified. Includes assumptions about what has or hasn't changed since the last similar call. | | **Second-order effect** | A consequence one step removed from the immediate change. What breaks downstream? | | **Stakeholder** | A person or group affected who isn't in the room. Who finds out and how? | | **Blast radius** | Reversibility plus cost-if-wrong. Is the user treating a one-way door as two-way? Is the failure mode sized correctly? | | **Base rate** | What usually happens to projects, decisions, or people in this reference class? Is the user the exception or the rule? | | **Time horizon** | What looks fine at 1 week and bad at 6 months? What looks bad now and fine later? | | **Counter-position** | The most credible person who'd disagree -- what would they say? What evidence would they cite? | ### Phase 3: Calibrate and commit Score each candidate on two axes: - **Impact-if-true** -- would knowing this change the decision, not just decorate it? - **Non-obviousness** -- has the user almost certainly already considered this? Drop it if yes. Then apply the **stretch test**. A candidate is "stretched" if it doesn't name a specific artifact, person, number, file, or premise from the actual situation. If **3 or more** of your candidates were stretched, the answer is **no blindspot** -- use the no template in Phase 4. Do not pick the strongest of weak candidates. Otherwise, pick the single highest-scoring candidate. If two tie, pick the one with the cheapest test. ### Phase 4: Deliver #### When you have a blindspot Reply with this shape, no headers, no preamble: > **The thing you're missing:** > > **Why it matters:** <2-3 sentences. What changes if this is true? What's the cost of missing it?> > > **What you'd see if it's real:** > > **Cheapest check:** #### When you don't (equally weighted, not a fallback) Reply with this shape -- same length, same commitment: > **The thing you're missing:** Nothing load-bearing that I can see. > > **Why I'm confident:** <2-3 sentences. Which lenses came up empty and why. Cite what's already accounted for in the > plan.> > > **What would change my mind:** > > **Cheapest gut-check anyway:** Stop after either shape. Do not append "let me know if you want more" or "happy to go deeper". ### Phase 5: Follow-ups (only on request) If the user reacts and asks for the next one, surface #2 in the same shape. Otherwise, the skill is done. ## Worked example Plan: "add a 1-hour cache to `/users` to cut DB load." > **The thing you're missing:** `/users` returns the caller's own profile, so a shared cache keyed only on URL will > serve user A's record to user B until the entry expires. > > **Why it matters:** Cross-tenant data leak in a hot endpoint. A 1-hour TTL means hundreds of leaked profile views > per cached entry before eviction. The cache key in the diff is the URL, not URL plus auth subject -- that's the bug. > > **What you'd see if it's real:** In staging, log in as user A, request `/users`, log out, log in as user B, request > `/users`. You see user A's profile. > > **Cheapest check:** Run that four-step sequence in staging in 10 minutes. ## Anti-patterns - Do NOT return a numbered list of 5 risks. That's a status report, not a blindspot. - Do NOT use any banned phrase from rule 7. - Do NOT cite generic categories ("security", "performance", "edge cases") without naming the specific artifact. - Do NOT ask more than two clarifying questions before committing. - Do NOT validate the plan. The user did not ask if the plan is good. They asked what's missing. - Do NOT manufacture a blindspot when the situation is well-scoped. The calibrated no is a first-class outcome, not a fallback for laziness -- it fires when the stretch test fires. - Do NOT include code unless the blindspot is literally a line of code -- words are cheaper.