adaptive-reasoning
Choose the right depth of reasoning for the task - shallow for routine edits, deep for architecture, security, or ambiguous bugs. Use when work quality depends on thinking harder (or intentionally less).
Install
npx skills add https://github.com/Navinspire-ia/navin/tree/main/navin/skills/adaptive-reasoning
claude plugin marketplace add https://llmmart.ai/marketplace.json && claude plugin install navinspire-ia-navin@llmmart
git clone https://github.com/Navinspire-ia/navin.git
The skills CLI installs just this skill, for any of its supported agents. Claude Code installs the whole navinspire-ia/navin collection as a plugin from our marketplace. Git is the plain clone.
Skill manifest
Adaptive Reasoning
Overview
Match cognitive effort to problem difficulty. Overthinking wastes tokens; underthinking causes rework.
Difficulty signals
| Signal | Mode |
|---|---|
| Typo, rename, single-file edit, clear instruction | Shallow - act immediately |
| Multi-file change, unclear bug, API design | Standard - inspect, plan briefly, act |
| Security, data loss, architecture, prod incident | Deep - explore alternatives, verify, then act |
| Conflicting requirements or missing facts | Clarify - ask 1-3 precise questions first |
| Chat / Ask mode with vague goal (even if a project folder is linked) | Clarify - questions first; no broad board/tree tour |
| Chat / Ask with no linked project | Clarify - never call tools until the target is concrete |
Workflow
- Classify the request using the table above (do not announce the label unless useful).
- Shallow: apply the change; skip long preambles.
- Standard:
- gather minimal context (
read_file/grep) - state a 2-4 line approach
- execute and verify
- gather minimal context (
- Deep:
- map constraints and failure modes
- compare 2 options when stakes are high
- verify with tests, dry-runs, or
execchecks - document the chosen trade-off in the final answer
- Clarify: call
ask_userwith 2-4 options and one recommended path. Do not ask an open question when a fork exists. If they skip, take the recommended option and say so.
Escalation
If a shallow task reveals surprises (unexpected deps, failing tests), escalate to Standard/Deep mid-turn without restarting from scratch.
Anti-patterns
- Writing a thesis for a one-line fix
- Jumping into code on security-sensitive changes without a threat check
- Asking many open-ended questions instead of a short plan with assumptions
Files (navin)
-
SKILL.md 2.1 KB
--- name: adaptive-reasoning description: Choose the right depth of reasoning for the task - shallow for routine edits, deep for architecture, security, or ambiguous bugs. Use when work quality depends on thinking harder (or intentionally less). metadata: {"navin":{"emoji":"🧠","category":"intelligence"}} --- # Adaptive Reasoning ## Overview Match cognitive effort to problem difficulty. Overthinking wastes tokens; underthinking causes rework. ## Difficulty signals | Signal | Mode | |--------|------| | Typo, rename, single-file edit, clear instruction | **Shallow** - act immediately | | Multi-file change, unclear bug, API design | **Standard** - inspect, plan briefly, act | | Security, data loss, architecture, prod incident | **Deep** - explore alternatives, verify, then act | | Conflicting requirements or missing facts | **Clarify** - ask 1-3 precise questions first | | Chat / Ask mode with vague goal (even if a project folder is linked) | **Clarify** - questions first; no broad board/tree tour | | Chat / Ask with no linked project | **Clarify** - never call tools until the target is concrete | ## Workflow 1. Classify the request using the table above (do not announce the label unless useful). 2. **Shallow**: apply the change; skip long preambles. 3. **Standard**: - gather minimal context (`read_file` / `grep`) - state a 2-4 line approach - execute and verify 4. **Deep**: - map constraints and failure modes - compare 2 options when stakes are high - verify with tests, dry-runs, or `exec` checks - document the chosen trade-off in the final answer 5. **Clarify**: call `ask_user` with 2-4 options and one recommended path. Do not ask an open question when a fork exists. If they skip, take the recommended option and say so. ## Escalation If a shallow task reveals surprises (unexpected deps, failing tests), escalate to Standard/Deep mid-turn without restarting from scratch. ## Anti-patterns - Writing a thesis for a one-line fix - Jumping into code on security-sensitive changes without a threat check - Asking many open-ended questions instead of a short plan with assumptions
Comments (0)
Sign in to join the conversation.
Reviews (0)
No reviews yet.
No comments yet.