---

name: critical-thinking description: Analyze arguments, detect biases, evaluate claims, and improve reasoning. Use when asked to fact-check, identify logical fallacies, evaluate arguments, analyze predictions, find root causes, or think adversarially about plans. Triggers include "evaluate this argument", "logical fallacies", "fact check", "analyze the claims", "identify biases", "devil's advocate", "red team this", "root cause".

Critical Thinking

Rigorous analysis of arguments, claims, and reasoning.

Pattern Selection

Decision Flow

CopyUser request
    │
    ├─ "evaluate claims/fact check" ──→ analyze_claims
    ├─ "predictions/forecasts" ──→ extract_predictions
    ├─ "controversial/contested" ──→ extract_controversial_ideas
    ├─ "what went wrong/mistakes" ──→ analyze_mistakes
    ├─ "root cause/core problem" ──→ extract_primary_problem
    ├─ "red team/devil's advocate" ──→ t_red_team_thinking
    ├─ "surprising/novel insights" ──→ extract_alpha
    └─ "organize my thinking" ──→ create_idea_compass

Pattern References

See references/ for full patterns:

• analyze_claims.md
• extract_predictions.md
• analyze_mistakes.md
• extract_primary_problem.md
• t_red_team_thinking.md
• extract_alpha.md
• create_idea_compass.md

Output Guidelines

• Always distinguish claims from evidence
• Rate confidence levels explicitly
• Identify logical fallacies by name
• Present steelman versions of arguments before critiquing
• Note when evidence is insufficient to conclude
• Acknowledge uncertainty and areas of genuine disagreement

Chaining Suggestions

• After analyze_claims → offer extract_primary_problem to find root issues
• After t_red_team_thinking → offer create_upgrade_pack to address weaknesses
• After extract_primary_problem → offer extract_primary_solution for solutions