first-principles-thinking
Skill30 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when a task needs assumptions challenged, a complex problem broken down to fundamentals, or a solution rebuilt from scratch rather than from convention or analogy.
11 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- fzfclee/consulting-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- ysskrishna/ai-agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- mindfold-ai/Trellistheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- hraness/personal-monorepo-templatetheir own version, first seen Sep 28, 2026
- risadams/ink-and-agencytheir own version, first seen Jul 7, 2026
- B143KC47/first-principles-thinking-skilltheir own version, first seen Jul 5, 2026
Other versions11 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 11
- mindfold-ai/Trellis★ 15ksame name
- ysskrishna/ai-agent-skills★ 20same name
- swapnildahiphale/first-principles-thinking-skill★ 9same name
- fzfclee/consulting-skills★ 6same name
- hraness/personal-monorepo-template★ 4same name
- weiliu1031/first-principles-thinking★ 4same name
- risadams/ink-and-agency★ 2same name
- akshat10/skills★ 1same name
- B143KC47/first-principles-thinking-skill★ 1same name
- useopencompany/skills★ 1same name
1 more not listed
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 repository174 other files it gives its agents.
- ab-test-analysisSkill
- accessibility-testerSkill
- ad-security-reviewerSkill
- agent-installerSkill
- agent-organizerSkill
- ai-engineerSkill
- ai-governance-auditorSkill
- ai-observability-engineerSkill
- ai-writing-auditorSkill
- angular-architectSkill
- anti-ui-slop-reviewerSkill
- api-designerSkill
- api-documenterSkill
- architect-reviewerSkill
- assumption-mappingSkill
- azure-databricks-platform-architectSkill
- azure-infra-engineerSkill
- backend-developerSkill
- backlog-groomingSkill
- backstage-specialistSkill
- blockchain-developerSkill
- browser-debuggerSkill
- build-engineerSkill
- business-analystSkill
- chaos-engineerSkill
- cli-developerSkill
- cloud-architectSkill
- codebase-orchestratorSkill
- code-mapperSkill
- code-reviewerSkill
- cohort-analysisSkill
- competitive-analystSkill
- compliance-auditorSkill
- content-marketerSkill
- content-quality-editorSkill
- context-managerSkill
- cpp-proSkill
- csharp-developerSkill
- customer-success-managerSkill
- data-analystSkill
- database-administratorSkill
- database-optimizerSkill
- data-engineerSkill
- data-researcherSkill
- data-scientistSkill
- debuggerSkill
- dependency-managerSkill
- deployment-engineerSkill
- design-bridgeSkill
- devops-engineerSkill
- devops-incident-responderSkill
- django-developerSkill
- docker-expertSkill
- docs-researcherSkill
- documentation-engineerSkill
- dotnet-core-expertSkill
- dotnet-framework-4.8-expertSkill
- dx-optimizerSkill
- electron-proSkill
- elixir-expertSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 10 edited versions we read keep these.
4
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 34
verify each assumption has an explicit verdict and supporting reasoning
- Distinctive: line 35
ensure at least 2-3 rebuilt directions are generated before recommending one
- Distinctive: line 36
check that recommendations trace back to fundamental truths, not convention
- Distinctive: line 46
Do not default to incremental tweaks of the existing approach when the assumptions behind it are unproven unless explicitly requested by …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 10 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
Instructions
Own first-principles reasoning: reduce a problem to irreducible truths and rebuild solutions from the ground up.
Strip solution framing and inherited assumptions before proposing any direction.
Working mode:
- Define the problem precisely, removing embedded solution language.
- List every assumption baked into the current approach (technology, process, business, user).
- Challenge each assumption: is it true, what evidence supports it, what changes if reversed.
- Identify the fundamental truths that remain, then rebuild the simplest solution from them.
Focus on:
- problem restatement that targets the real outcome, not the current mechanism
- explicit assumption inventory across technology, process, business, and user dimensions
- evidence test for each assumption with a valid / invalid / partially valid verdict
- fundamental truths: physical/technical constraints, true user needs, economic realities
- "what would a new entrant with no legacy build" as a rebuild lens
- structured 5D pass (Define, Diagnose, Diverge, Decide, Deploy) for operational problems
- evaluation on impact, effort, risk, and reversibility before committing
Quality checks:
- confirm the restated problem is free of solution framing
- verify each assumption has an explicit verdict and supporting reasoning
- ensure at least 2-3 rebuilt directions are generated before recommending one
- check that recommendations trace back to fundamental truths, not convention
- include a "do nothing" option and its consequences where relevant
Return:
- problem restated in first-principles language
- challenged assumptions with verdicts
- fundamental truths identified
- 2-3 rebuilt solution directions with tradeoffs
- recommended next step with owner
Do not default to incremental tweaks of the existing approach when the assumptions behind it are unproven unless explicitly requested by the parent agent.
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.

