Skip to content
Productivity
Skill

/thinking-circle-of-competence

Use when a specific claim may lack grounding. Check evidence boundary, size wrongness cost, then answer, fetch, or abstain — never confabulate.

From plugin
thinking-skills
1.3k28 skills
Install
$ npx -y skills add tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-circle-of-competence --agent claude-code

How it fires

How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.

  • Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
  • You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
  • Slash command/thinking-circle-of-competence

Context preview

The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.

Use when a specific claim may lack grounding. Check evidence boundary, size wrongness cost, then answer, fetch, or abstain — never confabulate.

SKILL.md

thinking-circle-of-competence.SKILL.md
name: thinking-circle-of-competence
description: Use when a specific claim may lack grounding. Check evidence boundary, size wrongness cost, then answer, fetch, or abstain — never confabulate.
disable-model-invocation: true

Circle of Competence

Treat competence as an evidence boundary, not self-image. Answer only when grounded; otherwise fetch, mark uncertainty, or abstain. The failure mode is a fluent fabrication treated as fact.

When to Use

  • About to assert a specific fact (API, path, number, config, version behavior) without a citable source from this session.
  • The claim is about this codebase or system and you have not read or run the relevant artifact.
  • Pattern reconstruction would sound complete but is unconfirmed.
  • Cost of a wrong confident answer is material (security, data, irreversible action, trust).

When NOT to Use

  • Claim is grounded in something you read, ran, or can cite this session, or is stable universal knowledge — answer without false humility.
  • Error cost is trivial and reversible and you will flag the claim as unverified.
  • Grounding is one cheap fetch away — fetch first; abstention is not an excuse to skip a check.
  • User explicitly wants labeled brainstorming or hypotheticals.

Procedure

1. **Name the claim.** Isolate the assertion that would be treated as fact. 2. **Classify the zone.**

  • *Grounded:* citeable session source (read/run) or stable non-version-specific knowledge.
  • *Partial:* general shape known; version/repo/config detail unconfirmed.
  • *Ungrounded:* would invent a concrete value with no source.

3. **Size wrongness cost.** If high-stakes (security, data loss, irreversible ops), treat Partial as Ungrounded until verified. 4. **Act by zone.**

  • Grounded → answer; cite when useful; do not hedge verified facts.
  • Partial → cheap fetch then answer; else answer only with explicit uncertainty and a check path.
  • Ungrounded → fetch if possible; else ask or abstain with what would enable an answer. Never invent.

5. **Refuse competence creep.** Adjacent code, prior versions, or general capability do not ground the unread target. 6. **Stop.** Emit answer, fetch request, or abstention. Do not round "probably" to a flat assertion.

**Stop condition:** Claim answered with grounding, marked partial with a check path, or refused with missing-evidence note.

Output

Claim: <assertion>
Zone: grounded | partial | ungrounded
Evidence: <source or none>
Wrongness cost: low | medium | high
Action: answer | fetch-then-answer | answer-with-uncertainty | abstain/ask
Response: <wording or missing artifact>

Verification

  • Falsify if a specific value was asserted with no session source and no uncertainty marker.
  • Falsify if Partial/high-stakes was treated as Grounded, or a cheap fetch was skipped for abstention theater.
  • Over-application guard: do not hedge or refuse claims verified this session.
Read more
Ships withthinking-skills

28 portable Agent Skills for structured reasoning in Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, Codex, Cursor, and other compatible tools Claude Code Thinking Skills is a public catalog of Agent Skills.

Get the whole plugin
Stats
1,301
Stars
158
Forks
Maintained
Maintenance
JavaScript
Language
MIT
License
1mo ago
Last commit
7mo ago
Created

Repo: tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills

Other skills on thinking-skills.