Use when someone is asking a question that is too narrow, too closed, or based on a hidden assumption that may be wrong. Upgrades weak questions and generates meta-questions to check whether the right question is even being asked. Triggers on:
Use when:
Not for:
Run Part 2 (meta-questions) first, then Part 1 (upgrade moves).
MCP note: If sequential-thinking is available, enforce this order: meta-question analysis → surface-form upgrade. Skipping meta-questions polishes the wrong question.
Before upgrading, ask:
| Weak pattern | Move | Stronger form |
|---|---|---|
| "Should I do X?" | Conditional | "What would need to be true for X to be right?" |
| "How do I get X?" | Why/What first | "What is actually preventing X right now?" |
| "Is X good?" | Stakes + context | "Good for whom, by what measure, over what timeframe?" |
| "What is the best Y?" | Scope + constraints | "Best for [specific goal] given [specific constraints]?" |
| "How do I fix Z?" | Diagnosis | "Is Z actually the problem, or a symptom?" |
Additional moves: inversion ("What would guarantee I fail?"), adding time horizon, removing embedded solution.
| Claude | You |
|---|---|
| Runs meta-question check to verify it's worth upgrading | Provide the question or problem framing |
| Names the specific weakness before upgrading | Confirm whether the hidden assumption resonates |
| Produces 1–3 upgraded questions maximum | Choose which upgraded question to actually pursue |
| Surfaces the question being avoided | Decide whether to confront that question |
assumption-extractor — for digging into the hidden premises a question rests onclarity-toolkit — when the problem is vague goals rather than weak questionsmental-model-toolkit — for reframing the problem itself when the question reveals a stuck frame