Ensure accessibility in UI components including semantic HTML, ARIA attributes, keyboard navigation, and WCAG 2.2 AA compliance.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Sequential thinking and structured problem solving. Break down complex problems into steps with revision and branching capabilities. Use for multi-step analysis, planning, and hypothesis verification.
インストール方法を見るインストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Optional standalone executor: The skill can run .claude/tools/optimization/sequential-thinking/executor.py. Requirements:
winget install Python.Python.3.12 (Windows), brew install python@3.12 (macOS).pip install mcpFull functionality: The Python script .claude/tools/optimization/sequential-thinking/executor.py must exist for standalone executor runs. Run node .claude/tools/cli/doctor.mjs to verify; doctor warns if the executor is missing.
Frameworks: Polya: (1) Understand the problem (2) Devise a plan (3) Carry out the plan (4) Look back. IDEAL: Identify → Define context → Explore strategies → Act on best → Look back and learn.
Process: Be systematic: preview outcomes, sustain effort, examine from multiple angles, pace and self-monitor. Use diagrams, tables, patterns; break into subgoals; work backwards when useful.
Hacks: Number thoughts (thoughtNumber, totalThoughts); allow revision and branching. Start with an initial step count and refine. Use the MCP sequential-thinking tool for multi-step analysis and hypothesis verification when the full scope is unclear.
No cert. Problem-solving frameworks: Polya (Understand → Plan → Execute → Look back), IDEAL (Identify → Define → Explore → Act → Look back). Skill data: Systematic steps; preview outcomes; sustain effort; revise and branch; use diagrams/tables/patterns.
Suggested hooks: Optional: pre-plan or pre-complex-task hook to suggest sequential-thinking for multi-step tasks. Use with planner (primary) for planning and master-orchestrator when decomposing work.
Workflows: Use with planner (primary). Flow: complex task → load sequential-thinking → emit thoughts (MCP or executor) → revise → act. See core/router-decision for when router assigns planner.
This skill provides structured problem-solving through a flexible thinking process that can adapt and evolve. Each thought can build on, question, or revise previous insights.
Context Savings: ~97% reduction
Use the MCP sequential thinking tool directly:
// Via MCP tool
mcp__sequential -
thinking__sequentialthinking({
thought: 'First, let me analyze the problem...',
thoughtNumber: 1,
totalThoughts: 5,
nextThoughtNeeded: true,
});
A detailed tool for dynamic and reflective problem-solving through thoughts.
| Parameter | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
thought | string | Your current thinking step |
thoughtNumber | integer | Current thought number (1, 2, 3...) |
totalThoughts | integer | Estimated total thoughts needed |
nextThoughtNeeded | boolean | Whether another thought step is needed |
isRevision | boolean | If this thought revises previous thinking |
revisesThought | integer | Which thought number is being reconsidered |
branchFromThought | integer | Branching point thought number |
branchId | string | Identifier for current branch |
needsMoreThoughts | boolean | If more thoughts needed at the "end" |
totalThoughts up or down as you progressnextThoughtNeeded: false only when truly doneThe sequential thinking tool is available via MCP. Use it directly in your responses:
// Execute a thinking step
mcp__sequential -
thinking__sequentialthinking({
thought: 'Your analysis here...',
thoughtNumber: 1,
totalThoughts: 5,
nextThoughtNeeded: true,
});
MCP server configuration stored in config.json:
npx -y @modelcontextprotocol/server-sequential-thinking@modelcontextprotocol/server-sequential-thinking.claude/skills/mcp-converter/nextThoughtNeeded: false before the solution hypothesis has been verifiedtotalThoughts dynamically as problem complexity becomes clearisRevision: true and revisesThought: N| Anti-Pattern | Why It Fails | Correct Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Fixed thought count | Thinking stops at an arbitrary estimate regardless of solution confidence | Set needsMoreThoughts: true and increase totalThoughts when complexity grows |
| No branching | Commits to the first approach without considering alternatives | Use branchFromThought to explore multiple solution paths before choosing |
| Skipping revisions | Incorrect assumptions propagate uncorrected through downstream thoughts | Mark all corrections with isRevision: true and revisesThought: N |
| Premature termination | Unverified hypothesis leads to incorrect or incomplete solutions | Verify the hypothesis explicitly before setting nextThoughtNeeded: false |
| No uncertainty markers | Overconfident conclusions mislead execution agents | Mark tentative thoughts explicitly; distinguish confident vs uncertain reasoning |
Before starting:
Read .claude/context/memory/learnings.md
After completing:
.claude/context/memory/learnings.md.claude/context/memory/issues.md.claude/context/memory/decisions.mdASSUME INTERRUPTION: If it's not in memory, it didn't happen.
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Ensure accessibility in UI components including semantic HTML, ARIA attributes, keyboard navigation, and WCAG 2.2 AA compliance.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when you want to improve response quality through meta-cognitive reasoning. Applies 15+ reasoning methods to reconsider and refine initial outputs.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
N-round opposing-stance debates for trade-off analysis. Assigns pro/con roles to agents, runs structured debate rounds with quality scoring, and produces a moderator synthesis with confidence-rated recommendation. Generalizable to architecture, technology, security, and design decisions.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Force adversarial code review stance that eliminates confirmation bias — reviewer must find issues or re-analyze
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Creates specialized AI agents on-demand when no existing agent matches a request. Use when the Router cannot find a suitable agent for a task. Enables self-evolution by generating persistent agents.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
LLM-as-judge evaluation framework with 5-dimension rubric (accuracy, groundedness, coherence, completeness, helpfulness) for scoring AI-generated content quality with weighted composite scores and evidence citations
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。