←Leaderboard/Prompting/cc-thinking-skills
Last commit on July 30, 2026·Created on January 28, 2026

tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills

“Apply structured reasoning to decisions and problems.”
Combined rank
#274
across all skills
In Prompting
#5
category rank
Stars
1.7k
+1.6% in last 7d
Forks
189
+2.2% in last 7d
Watchers
8
0.0% in last 7d
Traction scoreGitHub stars can be faked, so popularity alone can be misleading. Traction Score looks for broader signs of recent attention, adoption, and active maintenance.
TL;DR

This collection provides a set of eval-informed critical thinking frameworks designed for AI agents and automation builders. By implementing structured mental models, developers can guide tools like Claude Code or Cursor to handle complex technical tasks with greater precision.

The skills focus on grounding AI responses in evidence and establishing clear thresholds for investigation, helping agents recognize the boundaries of their own competence to avoid hallucinations.

WHO IT'S FOR
AI agent / automation builders
implementing critical thinking frameworks in AI agents
Technical leads / architects
reducing AI confabulation in complex technical tasks
Platform / DevEx teams
standardizing AI reasoning patterns across development tools
AI agent power users
guiding AI through first-principles problem solving
Compatible AgentsThe repository documents support for these agents. The skills may also work with other agents that can load SKILL.md files, but they may need some setup or small changes.

Use this skill collection

Follow the documented setup, then try a first task.

Setup

Select skills with Skills CLI

Installs: User-selected skills from the cc-thinking-skills repository bundle.

Before you start
  • npx must be available.
  1. Run this terminal command and select the desired skills when prompted.

    npx skills add tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills
README.md ↗ · Checked Nov 5, 2026

Give it something to do.

Suggested first task

Classify a decision by undo cost

Uses thinking-reversibility

  • A description of the decision
  • Known technical, time, financial, reputational, and dependency costs of reversing it
  • Any deadline or opportunity that waiting could permanently close

Make sure thinking-reversibility is installed in your agent before trying this task.

Use the thinking-reversibility skill to assess this decision: [describe the decision]. Identify a concrete undo path, classify it as Type 2, Type 1.5, or Type 1, compare the downside and recovery cost of acting with the permanent loss from waiting, and suggest one option-preserving move. Finish with the appropriate process depth and a proposed commitment; do not execute the decision.
Suggested first task

Choose a response mode for an uncertain problem

Uses thinking-cynefin

  • A description of the decision, incident, or subsystem
  • Observed cause-and-effect evidence
  • Urgency and whether small probes are safe

Make sure thinking-cynefin is installed in your agent before trying this task.

Use the thinking-cynefin skill to classify this problem: [describe the decision, incident, or subsystem]. Based on the available cause-and-effect evidence, predictability, urgency, and probe safety, assign one domain—clear, complicated, complex, chaotic, or disorder. Return the matching response mode, one to three first actions, and a falsifier that would force reclassification. If the problem is mixed, decompose it into separate units first.
Suggested first task

Test a proposal against its strongest opposition

Uses thinking-steel-manning

  • The proposal or preferred decision
  • The real alternative, if known
  • Relevant evidence, incentives, trade-offs, and failure concerns

Make sure thinking-steel-manning is installed in your agent before trying this task.

Use the thinking-steel-manning skill to evaluate this proposal: [proposal]. State the real alternative, extract the opposition's legitimate core concern, construct the strongest faithful opposing case using the supplied evidence, and name one concrete observation that would overturn the preferred position. Then engage that case and conclude with accept_opposing, revise, or reaffirm, including what changed and any residual risks.