First Principles Decomposer

**Judgement:** A strong, well‑scoped reasoning skill that adds real value when you need to challenge assumptions or design from first principles, especially in product, strategy, or process design contexts. **What it does well:** - Forces explicit listing and challenging of assumptions rather than jumping to solutions. - Drives the model to dig down to “bedrock” facts and then rebuild solutions only from those fundamentals. - Produces a clear, standardized output (`PROBLEM → ASSUMPTIONS → FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS → REBUILT SOLUTION → VS CONVENTIONAL`) that is easy to read and compare. - Has clear trigger phrases and a concise interaction pattern (1–2 clarification questions), which improves predictability and UX. **Risks / Limitations:** - The quality of “fundamental truths” will depend heavily on the model’s domain knowledge; in unfamiliar domains it may mistake opinions or common practices for fundamentals. - Users might over‑trust the decomposition as objectively correct, even though it’s still an interpretation and may omit important constraints or edge cases. - For simple, well‑understood problems, this process can be overkill and add latency and verbosity without much additional value. **Recommended scenarios:** - Early‑stage product, feature, or initiative design where you want to escape legacy solutions. - Strategic discussions where stakeholders explicitly want to “strip away” assumptions or challenge the status quo. - Coaching, facilitation, or workshop settings that aim to teach first‑principles thinking. - Combining with risk‑/future‑oriented skills (e.g., inversion, second‑order effects, pre‑mortem) after the first‑principles solution is drafted, to stress‑test it from multiple angles.