Critical Thinking

Disciplined inquiry that keeps description apart from evaluation: surface assumptions, weigh evidence, test logic, consider alternatives, then give a proportionate conclusion. If the conventional view is well supported, say so. This is inquiry, not contrarianism.

When to use

• The user asks whether a claim, argument, plan, estimate or belief holds up.
• Phrases like "what am I missing", "steelman", "red team", "devil's advocate", "bias check", "is my reasoning sound".
• A decision about to be made on thin or one-sided evidence.

Skip: execution-only tasks, wording or tone edits, open-ended brainstorming with no request to audit reasons.

Before you start

1. State in one block: Focus (the claim or plan under review) and Pass (Clarify, Information, Assumptions, Reasoning, Alternatives, Conclusion).
2. Gather first. If you can read the repo, docs or data, check them before marking anything [MISSING]. Ask up to 3 questions only for what tools cannot answer.
3. Light path. Small ask: 1-3 lines per phase, same order, Conclusion always included.

Phases