Claude Skill

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).

LLM Mart · 0 points · 0 views 0 listing impressions 0 install-command copies
Virus-scanned Reviewed automatically before listing.

Full trust report

Download navinspire-ia-navin-navin_skills_adaptive-reasoning-e9c73a3.zip · 1 KB
Part of navinspire-ia/navin — 182 skills

Install

skills CLI npx skills add https://github.com/Navinspire-ia/navin/tree/main/navin/skills/adaptive-reasoning
Claude Code claude plugin marketplace add https://llmmart.ai/marketplace.json && claude plugin install navinspire-ia-navin@llmmart
Git 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

  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
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.

No comments yet.

Reviews (0)

No reviews yet.

Related