Structured reasoning protocol for Claude — forces step-by-step analysis, self-critique, and confidence scoring before answering. Reduces wrong answers and ha...
--- name: thinkdeep version: 1.0.1 author: jiajiaoy homepage: https://clawhub.ai/skills/thinkdeep description: "Structured reasoning protocol for Claude — forces step-by-step analysis, self-critique, and confidence scoring before answering. Reduces wrong answers and hallucinations on complex questions." keywords: - chain of thought - reasoning - self-critique - confidence scoring - reduce hallucinations - structured thinking - think step by step - deep reasoning - analytical thinking - better answers - slow thinking - system 2 thinking - Claude wrong answers - AI hallucinations - Claude confident but wrong - AI makes mistakes - prevent wrong answers - Claude improvement - make Claude better - improve AI - AI agent - agentic - AI workflow - Claude Code - LLM reasoning - AI accuracy - ThinkStack - 深度思考 - 链式推理 - 减少幻觉 - AI推理错误 --- # Thinkdeep Make Claude think before it speaks. Thinkdeep applies a structured reasoning protocol that catches errors before they reach the user — turning fast-but-wrong into slower-but-right on complex questions. ## The Core Problem Fast answers feel efficient. On complex questions — debugging, system design, trade-off analysis — speed without reasoning produces confident wrong answers. Claude sounds certain even when it shouldn't be. Thinkdeep forces Claude to slow down at exactly the right moments. ## When to Activate Use Thinkdeep for: - Complex technical questions (system design, debugging, algorithms, security) - Decisions with meaningful trade-offs - Code review, risk assessment, root-cause analysis - Any question where a wrong answer has a real cost **Skip it for**: factual lookups, simple transformations, questions with an obvious single answer. ## The Protocol ### Step 1: Restate Restate the problem in your own words. If your restatement differs from what was asked, flag the discrepancy before continuing. ### Step 2: Explore Generate at least 3 distinct approaches or interpretations. Don't filter yet — quantity first. Include at least one non-obvious option. ### Step 3: Critique For each approach, identify its weakest point: - What assumption could be wrong? - What edge case breaks it? - What does it cost (time, complexity, risk)? ### Step 4: Select & Reason Choose the best approach. State explicitly: - Why this one beats the alternatives - What it requires to be true - What would change the answer ### Step 5: Confidence Check Rate your confidence 1–10 and name the 1–2 biggest sources of uncertainty. | Confidence | Meaning | Action | |-----------|---------|--------| | 8–10 | High — well-established ground | Proceed | | 5–7 | Medium — reasonable but verify | Flag key uncertainties | | 1–4 | Low — significant unknowns | Say so clearly; suggest how to resolve | If confidence < 6, lead with that, not bury it at the end. ## Output Format ``` [Thinking] Restate: ... Options: 1. ... 2. ... 3. ... Critique: 1. weakness: ... 2. weakness: ... 3. weakness: ... Selected: option N — because ... Confidence: X/10 — uncertain about: ... [Answer] ... ``` Use the `[Thinking]` block only when the reasoning adds value. For straightforward questions, answer directly. ## Anti-Patterns to Avoid - **False confidence** — never present a 4/10 answer as if it were a 9/10 - **Option theater** — don't list 3 options when one is obviously correct; be honest - **Analysis paralysis** — if confidence is genuinely unknowable, say so and give your best answer with caveats - **Restating without thinking** — the restate step is to catch misunderstandings, not filler ## Pairs Well With - **`clarity-first`** — run first to ensure the right question is being answered - **`task-pilot`** — execute with precision after the analysis is done Install the full ThinkStack for best results: ```bash openclaw install clarity-first openclaw install thinkdeep openclaw install task-pilot ```
don't have the plugin yet? install it then click "run inline in claude" again.