cut
Skill10 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Attack the hidden assumptions that could make the current plan look stupid in hindsight. Use before committing effort to a direction. Returns the load-bearing assumptions, how each breaks, the signal that would reveal the break, and the cheapest test to falsify it — then the top three kill-tests to run now.
5 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- clnnn/playbooktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- ivala2081/vibe-gametheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- lunaman81/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 6, 2026
- fuuuuuuma/premiere-skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 18, 2026
- barefootford/buttercuttheir own version, first seen Sep 14, 2026
Other versions5 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 5
- barefootford/buttercut★ 598same name
- fuuuuuuma/premiere-skills★ 14same name
- ivala2081/vibe-game★ 4same name
- clnnn/playbook★ 0same name
- lunaman81/claude-skills★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository24 other files it gives its agents.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 8
Every plan rests on assumptions.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
/ratchet:cut — the anti-delusion pass
Every plan rests on assumptions. Most are fine. A few are load-bearing and wrong, and those are the ones that waste days. This command finds them and hands you the cheapest test to kill each before it costs you.
Step 0 — Load state
ratchet statusProcedure
- Surface the assumptions the current objective and chosen bottleneck depend on. Include the silent ones — "the API returns what the docs say", "the user actually wants this", "this file is the source of truth", "the test suite covers this path".
- For each assumption, specify:
- Breakage mode — what specifically goes wrong if it is false.
- Detection signal — the observable that would reveal the break.
- Falsification test — the cheapest action that would prove it false. Prefer a five-minute check over a five-hour build.
- Rank by damage × likelihood. An assumption that is cheap to test and catastrophic if wrong goes first.
- Pick the top three kill-tests — the ones worth running before any further build. A kill-test is a test designed to end the plan cheaply, not to confirm it.
Output contract
ASSUMPTIONS (ranked by damage × likelihood):
- <assumption> | breaks: <mode> | signal: <detection> | test: <cheapest falsification>
- ...
TOP 3 KILL-TESTS (run before building):
1. <test> — kills the plan if: <result>
2. ...
3. ...Serialize
Record the riskiest untested assumptions so the loop can't forget them:
ratchet state append assumptions '{"text":"...","killTest":"...","status":"untested"}'
ratchet state set phase cutUntested assumptions drain confidence (ratchet score confidence). Run the kill-tests,
then mark survivors: append with "status":"tested" or "status":"killed".
Next: if the plan survives, /ratchet:build. If a kill-test lands, /ratchet:lock again.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

