title: Compare Options

description: Evaluate competing tools, libraries, or approaches against your needs.

content:
Compare these options for my use case: {{options}}

My context and constraints: {{context}}

For each option give: what it's best at, its real weaknesses, maturity/maintenance health, and lock-in/migration cost. Then make a recommendation for MY context, and state the one factor that would flip your choice. Avoid a feature-checklist tie — take a position and defend it.

options

description: The options to compare

context

description: Your use case and constraints


title: Literature/Prior-Art Scan

description: Map what's already known or built before you start.

content: Before I build/decide on {{topic}}, help me map the prior art. What are the established approaches, the well-known tools or papers, and the standard pitfalls people hit? What's the consensus, and where is it genuinely contested? Tell me what I should read or try first, and what's likely a dead end. Flag where your knowledge may be out of date so I can verify.

topic

description: What you're researching


title: Steelman and Critique

description: Pressure-test an idea by arguing both sides well.

content:
Here's an idea/claim: {{claim}}

First, steelman it: make the strongest honest case FOR it. Then critique it: the strongest case against, the hidden assumptions, and the conditions under which it fails. Finally, give your balanced judgment: is it right, and under what circumstances? Don't strawman either side.

claim

description: The idea or claim to test


title: Question Decomposition

description: Break a big, fuzzy question into answerable sub-questions.

content:
I'm trying to answer this hard question: {{question}}

Decompose it into the specific sub-questions I'd need to answer first, ordered so that earlier answers inform later ones. For each, note what kind of evidence would settle it and how hard it is to get. Identify the one sub-question that's the crux — where the overall answer most hinges.

question

description: The big question


title: Evaluate a Claim's Evidence

description: Assess how well-supported a claim actually is.

content:
Assess the evidence for this claim: {{claim}}

Source/context: {{source}}

Evaluate: what would have to be true for this to hold, how strong the actual support is, what's being assumed or omitted, and what alternative explanations exist. Distinguish what's demonstrated from what's asserted. Tell me how much confidence is warranted and what single piece of evidence would change your assessment most.

claim

description: The claim to assess

source

description: Where the claim comes from


title: Learn a New Topic Fast

description: Build an efficient learning path for an unfamiliar topic.

content:
I need to get productive in {{topic}}, starting from {{starting_point}}.

Design a learning path: the core concepts in dependency order, the 20% that delivers 80% of the value, a concrete first project to cement it, and the common misconceptions to avoid. Bias toward doing over reading. Tell me how I'll know I've actually learned it versus just recognizing the terms.

topic

description: What you want to learn

description: Your current level


title: Devise Experiments to Decide

description: Turn an open question into experiments that resolve it.

content:
I'm unsure about: {{uncertainty}}

Design the cheapest experiments to resolve it. For each: the hypothesis, the exact thing to measure, what result would confirm vs. refute, and roughly what it costs to run. Order them so the most decisive/cheapest comes first. Tell me the smallest experiment that would meaningfully reduce my uncertainty.

uncertainty

description: What you're unsure about


title: Synthesize Multiple Sources

description: Reconcile several sources into a coherent, honest picture.

content:
Synthesize these sources on {{topic}}:

{{sources}}

Where do they agree, and where do they conflict? For conflicts, assess which is more credible and why. Produce a coherent summary that represents the weight of evidence, explicitly notes the disagreements rather than papering over them, and flags what none of the sources address. Keep your own additions clearly separate from what the sources say.

topic

description: The topic

sources

description: The sources to synthesize


title: Compare Options with a Decision Matrix

description: Evaluate choices against weighted criteria.

content:
Help me choose between these options: {{options}}

Build a decision matrix. First derive the criteria that actually matter for {{goal}} and weight them. Score each option honestly, noting where evidence is thin. Surface the decisive criterion that the others hinge on. Give a recommendation, the runner-up, and the condition under which the runner-up would win instead. Call out any option I'm overrating for non-substantive reasons.

options

description: The options to compare

goal

description: What you're optimizing for


title: Find the Strongest Counterargument

description: Stress-test a position by steelmanning the other side.

content:
My position is: {{claim}}

Steelman the strongest case AGAINST it, the version a smart, informed opponent would actually make, not a strawman. Identify the assumption of mine it attacks and what evidence would settle the disagreement. Then tell me honestly whether my position survives, needs qualification, or should change. Don't be agreeable for its own sake.

claim

description: The position to test


title: Summarize a Source for a Goal

description: Extract from a text only what serves your purpose.

content:
Summarize this source with a specific purpose: {{goal}}

{{source}}

Don't give a generic abstract; pull out what matters FOR that goal: the claims, evidence, methods, or numbers I can use, and the caveats that limit them. Note what the source conspicuously doesn't address. Separate what it demonstrates from what it merely asserts. End with how much weight I should put on it.

goal

description: Why you're reading it

source

description: The source text


title: Plan a Literature Search

description: Find what's known about a topic systematically.

content:
I need to find out what's known about: {{topic}}

Plan the search so I don't miss the important work or drown in noise. Suggest the search terms and their synonyms, the places to look, and how to follow citation trails both backward and forward. Tell me how to recognize the seminal sources and the current state of the debate. Define when I've searched enough to stop, and the bias that would make me stop too early.

topic

description: The topic to research


title: Fact-Check a Claim

description: Assess whether a specific claim holds up.

content:
Fact-check this claim: {{claim}}

Break it into the specific, checkable assertions it actually makes. For each, what evidence would confirm or refute it, and how strong that evidence is. Separate what is well-established from what is contested or unknown. Watch for the ways a claim misleads while being technically true — cherry-picked stats, missing context, correlation as causation. Give a calibrated verdict (true / misleading / false / unverifiable) with your confidence and what would change it.

claim

description: The claim to check


title: Build a Reading List

description: Curate an ordered path into a topic.

content:
Build me a reading list to understand: {{topic}}

Order it as a path, not a pile: start with the one or two sources that build the foundation, then progressively deeper or more specialized ones. For each, say what it gives me and why it is on the list (and roughly how hard it is). Include the seminal source and a recent overview. Cut the redundant and the merely famous. Tell me where I can stop if I just need working knowledge versus mastery.

topic

description: The topic to learn


title: Identify Knowledge Gaps

description: Find what you don't yet know about a question.

content:
Here is what I currently know about: {{topic}}

{{current_understanding}}

Find the gaps. What questions are still unanswered, what assumptions am I treating as fact, and what would an expert immediately ask that I haven't considered? Separate the gaps that actually matter for my goal from interesting tangents. Rank them by how much resolving each would change my conclusion. End with the single most important thing to go find out next.

description: The topic

description: What you know so far


title: Triangulate Conflicting Sources

description: Reconcile sources that disagree.

content:
These sources disagree about: {{question}}

{{sources}}

Figure out where the truth likely lies. Identify exactly what they disagree on versus where they actually agree. For each, consider its credibility, recency, incentives, and method. Explain WHY they differ — different definitions, data, timeframes, or bias. Give your best-supported synthesis, the confidence it deserves, and what evidence would settle it. Don't just average them or pick the one you like.

question

description: The disputed question

sources

description: The conflicting sources