‹ 首页

think

@myclaude-sh · 收录于 1 周前

Brainstorm, evaluate, or decide during product creation. Pause the pipeline to think through a problem, compare approaches, or explore ideas before committing. Use when: 'think about', 'brainstorm', 'evaluate', 'compare', 'should I', 'help me decide', 'what if', 'not sure about', or any hesitation during /fill.

适合你,如果在产品创建中常需停下来理清思路

/ 下载安装
think.skill双击,或拖进 Claude 桌面版 / Cowork,即完成安装↓ .skill↓ .zip
用别的 agent?下载 .zip 解压,把文件夹放进它的技能目录
Claude Code~/.claude/skills/(项目级 .claude/skills/)
Codex CLI~/.codex/skills/
Cursor自动读取上面两处目录
其他工具见其文档的「skills」目录;两个下载是同一份文件,只是名字不同
/ 通过 npx 安装 校验哈希
npx oh-my-skill add myclaude-sh/myclaude-creator-engine/think
/ 通过 bash 安装
curl -fsSL https://oh-my-skill.com/install.sh | bash -s -- myclaude-sh/myclaude-creator-engine/think
/ 已经装过?验证本机副本,不用重装
npx oh-my-skill verify myclaude-sh/myclaude-creator-engine/think
安装目标可用 --agent / --scope 或 --to 明确指定;省略时只会在唯一已存在的 agent 目录上自动选择,零命中或多命中会停止并提示。content_hash 缺失或不一致均拒装。
24GitHub stars
~1.4K上下文体积 · 单文件
镜像托管

怎么用

技能原文 SKILL.md作者撰写 · MIT · e73fe47

Think — Mid-Process Brainstorming & Decision Support

The pipeline builds. This skill thinks. Use it whenever you need to pause, explore, or decide.

When to use: Between any two pipeline steps. During /fill when you're unsure about a section. Before /create when choosing a product type. Before /publish when evaluating readiness.

When NOT to use: For mechanical tasks (/validate, /package). Those have deterministic flows — thinking slows them down.


Activation Protocol
  1. Shared preamble: Load references/quality/activation-preamble.md — context assembly, persona adaptation, deterministic routing rules.
  2. Read creator.yaml → adapt to profile.type and technical_level
  3. If a product is active (workspace/{slug}/ exists), read .meta.yaml → understand current context
  4. Parse $ARGUMENTS or conversation context to identify the thinking need
  5. Route to the appropriate thinking mode
  6. Load voice identity: Load references/quality/engine-voice-core.md. Every user-facing line in this skill honors the ✦ signature, three tones, and six anti-patterns.

5b. Load UX vocabulary: Load references/ux-vocabulary.md — translate all internal terms before creator-facing output. 5c. Load proactives: Load references/engine-proactive.md — wire #17 (lost creator detection: if the creator has been in /think for 3+ questions without resolution, suggest concrete next step or /scout).


Thinking Modes
MODE 1: Brainstorm (divergent)

Trigger: "brainstorm", "ideas for", "what could", "possibilities"

Generate 5-7 distinct approaches to the creator's question. For each:

  • Name it in 3 words
  • One sentence description
  • Strength (why this works)
  • Risk (why it might not)

End with: "Which resonates? Or want me to combine elements from multiple?"

MODE 2: Evaluate (convergent)

Trigger: "evaluate", "compare", "which is better", "pros and cons"

Structure the evaluation as a decision matrix:

EVALUATING: {what's being compared}

| Criterion | Option A | Option B | Option C |
|-----------|----------|----------|----------|
| {criterion_1} | {score/assessment} | ... | ... |
| {criterion_2} | ... | ... | ... |

RECOMMENDATION: {option} because {one-sentence reasoning}
RISK: {what could go wrong with the recommendation}
MODE 3: Decide (commit)

Trigger: "should I", "help me decide", "which type", "what approach"

Walk through a 3-step decision:

  1. What are you optimizing for? (speed, quality, simplicity, market fit)
  2. What are the constraints? (time, skill level, dependencies)
  3. Given 1+2, the best path is: {recommendation with clear reasoning}

Then: "Ready to act on this? Here's the command: {next_command}"

MODE 4: Explore (research)

Trigger: "what if", "how does", "is there a way to", "explore"

Investigate the question using available context:

  • Search workspace/ for related patterns
  • Check product-dna/ for type-specific guidance
  • Search marketplace via myclaude search --json 2>/dev/null if relevant (silent-skip on failure per references/cli-contract.md)
  • Read references/ for best practices

Synthesize findings, then suggest actionable next steps.

MODE 5: Unstuck (unblock)

Trigger: "I'm stuck", "not sure", "confused", "don't know how"

Diagnose the block:

  1. Read current product state from .meta.yaml
  2. Identify where in the pipeline the creator is stuck
  3. Ask ONE clarifying question to narrow the block
  4. Offer 2-3 concrete paths forward, each as a command or action

Context-Aware Behavior

If invoked DURING /fill (detected by conversation context):

  • Don't break the section walker flow
  • Frame thinking as "let's pause on this section"
  • After thinking resolves, seamlessly resume: "Ready to continue with {next_section}?"

If invoked BETWEEN commands:

  • Full thinking mode, no time pressure
  • Can explore multiple angles

If invoked with a product slug:

  • Load that product's full context before thinking
  • Frame recommendations in terms of that specific product

Marketplace Intelligence

CLI contract: Load references/cli-contract.md for unified error handling. Both commands are silent-skip severity — thinking proceeds without marketplace data if CLI is unavailable.

If the thinking question is about product strategy ("should I build X?", "is there demand for Y?"):

myclaude search "{relevant_query}" --json 2>/dev/null
myclaude trending --json 2>/dev/null

Surface: how many similar products exist, their download counts, pricing, and gaps.

"There are {N} products in this space. The top one has {downloads} downloads. Your differentiation could be: {suggestion based on gap analysis}."


Anti-Patterns
  1. Analysis paralysis — If the creator has been thinking for 3+ rounds without deciding, gently push: "You have enough information to start. The best way to test an idea is to build v1. You can always iterate."
  2. Thinking when doing is needed — If the question has an obvious answer ("should I add a README?"), skip thinking mode and just do it.
  3. Scope expansion — Thinking can expand scope. Always anchor back: "This is interesting, but for YOUR current product ({slug}), the relevant part is: {focused takeaway}."
  4. Replacing /validate — Thinking is subjective exploration. Quality checks are objective. Don't let /think substitute for /validate.
  5. Endless brainstorm — Cap brainstorm rounds at 3. After 3: "We've explored enough. Pick one and let's build."

Quality Gate
  • [ ] Thinking output is actionable (ends with a clear next step or command)
  • [ ] Adapted to creator's language and technical level
  • [ ] If product context exists, thinking is anchored to that product
  • [ ] Analysis paralysis guard: no more than 3 rounds without a decision push

Compact Instructions

When summarizing this conversation, always preserve:

  • The specific question or decision the creator was thinking about
  • Key options evaluated and the reasoning for/against each
  • The final recommendation or decision made
  • Any marketplace data surfaced during exploration
  • The command or action suggested as next step
按 MIT 许可原样转载,未经改动 · 在 GitHub 查看 →

评论

登录即可评论;带「已验证安装」的,是发布者名下有本店的安装或持有记录。