agentleFS
markoblogomarkoblogo/abvx-agent-skills/skills/hypothesis-diversification/SKILL.md

hypothesis-diversification

Skill16 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Generate diverse hypotheses, explanations, or solution candidates before evidence review. Use for research, incident analysis, market or product reasoning, adversarial review, and SkillOpt proposal generation when first-answer mode collapse would hide alternatives.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

11 rules. About 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈10

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use this skill to make the agent produce multiple plausible alternatives before it argues for one.

    line 12
  2. Distinctive:

    Run an adversarial pass:

    line 30
  3. Distinctive:

    remove candidates that are only wording variants.

    line 32
  4. Distinctive:

    add at least one non-obvious or contrarian alternative when the domain allows it.

    line 33
  5. Very specific:

    When used with skillopt-evolve-skills, generate multiple bounded edit proposals before the validation gate:

    line 39
  6. Distinctive:

    do not combine several unrelated improvements into one proposal.

    line 43
  7. Distinctive:

    Do not treat verbalized or model-estimated probabilities as calibrated probabilities.

    line 60
  8. Distinctive:

    Do not use this as a standalone financial, legal, medical, or safety decision method.

    line 61
  9. Distinctive:

    Do not use candidate diversity as completion evidence.

    line 62
  10. Distinctive:

    Do not add runtime autonomy, trading execution, or position-sizing logic from this pattern.

    line 63
  11. Distinctive:

    Keep the candidate set small enough to review.

    line 64

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Hypothesis Diversification

Use this skill to make the agent produce multiple plausible alternatives before it argues for one.

Use When

  • a research answer, diagnosis, plan, or market explanation may collapse onto the first plausible story;
  • you need adversarial review before accepting a confident recommendation;
  • a SkillOpt run should generate several bounded edit proposals before validation;
  • a SET bundle or agent handoff needs review lenses that ask for alternatives, not runtime autonomy.

Workflow

  1. State the decision or question in one sentence.
  2. Generate 3-8 distinct hypotheses or candidate proposals.
  3. For each candidate, record:
    • claim: what would be true if this candidate is right;
    • evidence needed: what would support it;
    • disconfirming signal: what would weaken or falsify it;
    • cost of being wrong: low, medium, or high.
  4. Run an adversarial pass:
    • merge duplicates;
    • remove candidates that are only wording variants;
    • add at least one non-obvious or contrarian alternative when the domain allows it.
  5. Rank candidates by evidence readiness, not by model confidence.
  6. Hand off to the relevant validation gate, evidence ledger, reviewer, or domain process.

SkillOpt Mode

When used with skillopt-evolve-skills, generate multiple bounded edit proposals before the validation gate:

  • each proposal must fit the edit budget;
  • each proposal must name the target artifact and operation: append, replace, delete, or move;
  • do not combine several unrelated improvements into one proposal;
  • reject plausible proposals that are overfit, duplicate existing rules, or weaken a guardrail.

Output Shape

Use:

  • question or decision;
  • candidate set;
  • evidence needed;
  • disconfirming signals;
  • adversarial notes;
  • validation handoff;
  • rejected candidates, if any.

Guardrails

  • Do not treat verbalized or model-estimated probabilities as calibrated probabilities.
  • Do not use this as a standalone financial, legal, medical, or safety decision method.
  • Do not use candidate diversity as completion evidence; every accepted candidate still needs validation.
  • Do not add runtime autonomy, trading execution, or position-sizing logic from this pattern.
  • Keep the candidate set small enough to review.

Provenance

Inspired by "Verbalized Sampling: How to Mitigate Mode Collapse and Unlock LLM Diversity" (arXiv:2510.01171), adapted as an ABVX research and adversarial-review pattern rather than a decision engine.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.