agentsclimarketplace

First principles

Skill opelpleple/meta-skills/first-principles

17 model-agnostic thinking & context-engineering skills for Claude — clarify, attack your own plan, manage the context window, verify before trusting. grill-me-style process skills.

Install
npx -y skills add opelpleple/meta-skills --skill first-principles

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 0 stars0 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Breaks a problem down to fundamental, irreducible truths and rebuilds a solution from them, refusing to reason by analogy or by copying how others already do it. Use this skill when the user is stuck in conventional thinking, asks "why do we even do it this way", wants to challenge baked-in assumptions, faces a hard design or strategy problem with no obvious answer, says "think from first principles", "go back to basics", "forget how everyone else does it", or suspects the standard approach is cargo-culted rather than reasoned. Best when the default solution feels expensive, slow, or inherited rather than chosen.

SKILL.md

4.6 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

First Principles

Strip a problem down to the few things that are actually, physically, definitionally true — then build the answer up from only those, ignoring how it's "normally" done.

When to use

  • The current approach exists because "that's how it's always been done."
  • A solution feels too expensive/slow/complex and you suspect the cost is assumed, not real.
  • You're benchmarking against competitors and copying their structure by default.
  • A hard design problem where analogies keep leading to mediocre answers.
  • The user explicitly wants to challenge a deeply held assumption.

When NOT to use

  • Routine, well-understood tasks where convention is correct and cheap (don't re-derive a login form).
  • Time-critical decisions where "good enough, now" beats "optimal, eventually."
  • Domains where the "convention" is actually hard-won safety regulation or law — question it intellectually, but don't ignore it operationally.

The method

  1. State the goal as an outcome, not a method. Write what must be true at the end, with zero reference to current tools, vendors, or steps. "Customers trust our data" — not "we run more audits."
  2. List everything you believe about the problem. Dump assumptions, constraints, costs, "rules." Be exhaustive and honest.
  3. Interrogate each item: truth or inheritance? For each, ask "Is this a law of physics/math/economics, or just a convention someone handed me?" Tag each as FUNDAMENTAL (can't be reduced) or DERIVED (someone's choice, possibly wrong).
  4. Keep reducing the fundamentals. For each "fundamental," ask "why?" again. Stop only when the next "why" hits a real constraint — a material cost, a physical limit, a definitional requirement, a hard regulation. These are your bedrock truths.
  5. Quantify the bedrock. Put real numbers/limits on each truth. What does the raw material/compute/time actually cost at the floor? This exposes the gap between the floor and the conventional price.
  6. Rebuild upward using only bedrock truths. Construct a solution that satisfies the goal using nothing but the fundamentals. Forbid yourself from importing any DERIVED step unless you can re-justify it from bedrock.
  7. Compare to the conventional solution. Where the two diverge is your insight — and where the conventional approach is paying a tax for an assumption that isn't true.

What good looks like

  • A short list of genuinely irreducible truths, each with a number or hard reason attached.
  • At least one "wait, why do we even need that?" moment where a sacred step turns out to be optional.
  • A rebuilt solution that a smart skeptic can't dismiss as "you just reinvented the wheel."
  • Clear separation between what's a real constraint and what was merely habit.

Anti-patterns

  • Fake first principles: restating the conventional answer in fancier words. If your rebuild matches convention exactly, you didn't reduce far enough.
  • Stopping too early: treating a vendor's pricing or an industry norm as bedrock when it's just a market choice.
  • Reducing past usefulness: "everything is atoms" is true and useless. Stop at the lowest level that still lets you act.
  • Ignoring real constraints: declaring a law of physics or a safety regulation "just a convention."

Example

Goal: "Make our broker audits cheaper." Conventional answer: hire more auditors. First-principles pass: What is an audit, fundamentally? It's acquiring trustworthy evidence about a claim. The fundamental cost is not "an auditor's hour" — it's the cost of obtaining one verified fact. List the facts a broker review needs; ask which require a human and which require only a primary-source signal (a regulator's public registry, a settlement record). The bedrock truth: most facts are publicly verifiable data, not judgment calls. Rebuild: a pipeline that pulls primary-source signals automatically and routes only the genuine judgment calls to humans. The "tax" convention was paying: treating verifiable lookups as if they needed expert labor.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.