strategic-thinking
Skill20 starsChanged 29 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use for strategic thinking, or when the user must choose a direction under constraints: "where should we focus?", "how do we win?", "roadmap for next year", "what should we not do?". Ends in explicit bets and risks. Skip for step-by-step implementation.
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- juken666/qiushi-skills-2.0their own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- buildingwithai/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 11, 2025
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- juken666/qiushi-skills-2.0★ 8same name
- buildingwithai/skills★ 1same 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 repository17 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- analytical-thinkingSkill
- creative-thinkingSkill
- critical-thinkingSkill
- design-thinkingSkill
- ethical-thinkingSkill
- fermi-estimationSkill
- first-principles-thinkingSkill
- five-whysSkill
- lateral-thinkingSkill
- pre-mortemSkill
- prioritizationSkill
- six-thinking-hatsSkill
- swot-analysisSkill
- systems-thinkingSkill
- thinking-method-selectorSkill
- tradeoff-analysisSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
Distinctive · estimate
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 26
Gather first: Read the roadmap, docs, metrics or market notes you can reach before writing Landscape.
- Distinctive: line 28
If the user wants a memo or deck storyline, add a Short story after Risks and Cadence (5-7 sentences: tension, insight, decision, proof …
≈ “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.
Files
Strategic Thinking
Strategy is choosing what not to do as much as what to do. End with explicit bets and guardrails.
When to use
- Choosing a direction for a product, team, company, technology platform or career under real constraints.
- Competitive positioning, "where to play and how to win", roadmap narrative, portfolio trade-offs.
- Leadership or board-style narrative that links goals to constraints.
Skip: step-by-step implementation detail, or choosing between two concrete options on named criteria.
Before you start
- State in one block: Strategic question (one sentence) and Pass (Intent, Landscape, Advantage, Options, Choice, Risks and Cadence).
- Gather first. Read the roadmap, docs, metrics or market notes you can reach before writing Landscape. Never invent market facts; say what is unknown. Ask up to 3 questions only for goals and non-negotiables that tools cannot answer.
- Light path. Small ask: 1-2 lines per phase, 2 options, same order.
- If the user wants a memo or deck storyline, add a Short story after Risks and Cadence (5-7 sentences: tension, insight, decision, proof path).
Phases
1. Intent
Win definition: which outcome, by when. Non-goals: what is explicitly out of scope.
2. Landscape
Forces that matter: customers, competition, technology, regulation, economics. Use Implication: bullets, not encyclopedic lists. Keep short when information is thin.
3. Advantage (or Honest gap)
Where could durable advantage come from: assets, learning loops, distribution, data, brand, cost? If none is credible, say so and pivot to how to build one.
4. Options
2-4 genuinely different strategies:
Option: ... - Bet: ... - Cost: ... - Kill signal: ...
5. Choice
Name one primary option (parallel bets only if clearly justified). Say why now and what you are deferring or rejecting.
6. Risks and Cadence
Top 3 risks with mitigations. Then a near-term focus, a longer-term thesis and a review trigger (a metric or event that forces a rethink). Match the horizons to the domain: 90 days and 12 months suit a business plan; an architecture or career decision may need different spans, so state the spans you chose.
Pitfalls
- Platitudes ("innovate", "customer-centric") with no mechanism.
- Options that are really one option in different words.
- A Choice that introduces a strategy not in Options. Label it a revision if so.
- Advantage claimed with no evidence. Use Honest gap.
Worked example: references/example.md.
Checklist
- Strategic question and Pass stated
- Intent includes non-goals
- Options use Bet, Cost, Kill signal
- Choice explicit, with what is deferred or rejected
- Risks and Cadence: top 3 risks, stated horizons, review trigger
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.