shaping: from unformed intent to something actionable

Shaping converges an unformed intent into something the user can act on: a requirement spec, a solution design, a set of genuinely different candidates, a grounded call. The method is exclusion. Each round rules out part of what the deliverable could be, until what remains is small enough to act on.

Pay per gap, not per pipeline. Divergence and grilling are operators called when their gap blocks, never stages every request walks through.

When not to run

A request that already points at one thing (execute an existing spec, answer a question, deliver settled content) leaves nothing to exclude. Complete the original request directly. Zero questions, zero files, no mention of this skill. Life and career decisions are not this skill's work either. When it cannot be told whether this applies, it does not. A later message with a stronger signal can still enter.

A mixed request exempts only its execution items, never its question. When a request bundles build items with an undecided question whose answer changes what gets built, converge that question first (usually entering directly at 2→3), deliver the call with grounds, then continue the execution items. A majority of execution items is not a reason to skip the question.

A candidate the user brings is a candidate, not a decision. "Maybe just X" enters 2→3 to be judged alongside the alternatives. It does not close the gate.

Three working rules

1. Output that excludes nothing is not progress. A pile of candidates excludes nothing. Same-family rewordings exclude nothing. A question whose answer would not change the deliverable excludes nothing.
2. Every exclusion carries its grounds, and what new evidence would reopen it. When grounds are missing, do not fake a recommendation. Recommend the smallest action that buys the evidence.
3. Any exclusion can be reopened by new evidence, and reopening beats refining. When the frame is wrong, stop decorating inside it.