Structured reasoning framework for problem decomposition, decision-making under uncertainty, causal analysis, and system architecture evaluation.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/ai-driven-development:fpf-problem-solvingThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
An "Operating System for Thought" — a transdisciplinary architecture for reasoning,
FPF-SKILL-UPDATE-GUIDE.mdREADME.mdscripts/split_spec.pysections/01-first-principles-framework-core-conceptual-specification/_index.mdsections/02-table-of-content/01-keywords-search-queries-discipline.mdsections/02-table-of-content/_index.mdsections/03-preface/01-what-this-specification-is.mdsections/03-preface/02-creativity-in-open-ended-evolution-and-assurance.mdsections/03-preface/03-navigating-uncertainty-building-closed-worlds-within-an-open.mdsections/03-preface/04-fpf-as-an-evolutionary-architecture-for-thought.mdsections/03-preface/05-architectural-characteristic-of-thought.mdsections/03-preface/06-beyond-cognitive-biases-fpf-as-a-generative-architecture-for.mdsections/03-preface/07-thinking-through-writing-the-fpf-discipline-of-conceptual-wo.mdsections/03-preface/08-descriptive-ontologies-vs-a-thinking-oriented-architecture.mdsections/03-preface/09-the-bitter-lesson-trajectory-compute-data-and-freedom-over-h.mdsections/03-preface/10-from-flat-documents-to-high-dimensional-truth-the-multi-view.mdsections/03-preface/11-boundary-statements-where-language-becomes-a-system-boundary.mdsections/03-preface/12-raising-semantic-precision-from-triggers-to-math-backed-onti.mdsections/03-preface/13-the-big-storylines-unique-to-fpf.mdsections/03-preface/14-transdisciplinarity-as-a-meta-theory-of-thinking.mdAn "Operating System for Thought" — a transdisciplinary architecture for reasoning, written in human- and machine-readable pseudo-code. FPF turns raw intelligence (human or machine) into organisationally usable reasoning: explicit bounded contexts, auditable artefacts, multi-view descriptions, and disciplined hand-offs between specialised actors.
Use FPF whenever you need to think more rigorously than the situation's default.
The use cases above help decide WHETHER to invoke FPF. The router below decides WHERE to go once invoked.
| What you need to do | Start here |
|---|---|
| Decompose a complex whole into bounded parts | 04 Kernel → A.1 Holons, A.1.1 Bounded Contexts, A.14 Mereology |
| Assign roles and responsibilities | 04 Kernel → A.2 Roles, A.15 Role-Method-Work Alignment |
| Set boundaries on what statements mean | 05 Signature Stack → classify as definitions, gates, duties, or evidence |
| Prevent category errors (role vs. function, method vs. work) | 06 Constitutional Principles → A.7 Strict Distinction |
| Evaluate confidence in a claim or artifact — including formality, scope, and reliability of the underlying knowledge | 07 Part B → B.3 Trust & Assurance; 08 Part C → C.2 KD-CAL / F-G-R scoring, C.2.2 Reliability, C.2.3 Formality |
| Compose parts into wholes preserving properties | 07 Part B → B.1 Gamma algebra; 08 Part C → C.13 Compose-CAL, C.20 Discipline-CAL |
| Reason through a problem systematically | 07 Part B → B.5 Reasoning Cycle, B.5.2 Abductive Loop |
| Generate alternatives / explore solution space | 08 Part C → C.18 NQD Open-Ended Search, C.19 Explore-Exploit |
| Measure and compare options rigorously | 06 A.V → A.17-A.19 Characteristics, CSLC & SelectorMechanism; 08 Part C → C.16 MM-CHR |
| Resolve conflicts across stakeholders or values | 09 Part D → Ethics & Conflict |
| Unify vocabulary across teams or domains | 13 F.I Context of Meaning → 14-15 UTS tables → 20 Lexical Debt |
| Document for multiple audiences | 11 E-I Constitution → E.17 Multi-View Publication Kit |
| Sharpen expression — repair vague wording, surface ambiguity, restore precision of epistemic / measurement / architecture terms | 11 E-I → E.10.ARCH Wording-Use Ontological Precision Restoration, E.17.EFP Explanation Faithfulness; 08 Part C → C.2.P Epistemic Precision Restoration, C.16.P Characteristic and Scale Precision Restoration, C.30.P Architecture and Structure Precision Restoration; 05 A.IV.A → A.6.H Wholeness Unpacking |
| Decide under uncertainty — structure options, weigh evidence, commit with auditable rationale | 08 Part C → C.11 Decsn-CAL |
| Reason about time and change — distinguish state readings, trends, and intervention-sensitive change | 08 Part C → C.27 Temporal Claim Adequacy |
| Establish causality — climb the causality ladder, identify causal structure, check realizability | 08 Part C → C.28 CausalUse-CAL |
| Check mathematical or modeling fit — assess whether a formal lens / math model is adequate for the problem | 08 Part C → C.29 MLA Mathematical Lens Adequacy |
| Describe architecture or structural views — characterise structure, produce adequate architectural descriptions and view types | 08 Part C → C.30 ADA, C.30.ASV Architecture Structural View; 07 Part B → A.22 STRUCT-CAL |
| Model context-dependent or indeterminate states — represent superposed, probe-coupled, or viability-bounded behaviour | 08 Part C → C.26 Quantum-Like Modeling Lens, C.26.1 Probe-Coupled Boundary, C.26.2 Enacted Distributed State, C.26.3 Viability-Envelope |
| Survey a discipline and build a reusable toolkit | 16 Part G → SoTA Packs, TraditionCards, OperatorCards; 08 Part C → C.21 Discipline-CHR (field health & maturity) |
| Classify a problem type before solving | 08 Part C → C.22 Problem-CHR, C.3 Kind-CAL (typed reasoning) |
| Define quality attributes ("-ilities") as structured bundles | 08 Part C → C.25 Q-Bundle; 06 A.V → A.17-A.19 Characteristics |
| Orchestrate agentic tool use under budgets and trust gates | 08 Part C → C.24 Agent-Tools-CAL |
| Trace provenance of a claim | 06 A.V → A.10 Evidence Graph; 16 Part G → G.6 Provenance Ledger |
For complex problems, follow paths across multiple sections — the router shows where to start, not where to stop.
_index.md of the target section folder — it lists all sub-sections with line counts and descriptions.Use plain language for the user. Introduce FPF-internal names (U.Holon, Gamma, F-G-R) only when they add precision the user needs.
When a problem draws from multiple sections:
You have the FPF specification loaded. Help me structure my project / problem / programme. Use plain language for an engineer-manager. Propose: (1) bounded contexts / specialisations, (2) decision criteria, (3) key alternatives, (4) hand-offs, and (5) missing evidence or tests before commitment. Introduce internal FPF names only when they add precision.
Structural reference. Each entry is a folder — read its _index.md first, then pick the sub-section.
| # | Section | Sub | When to use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Title page | 0 | Authorship, version date, top-level identity. |
| 02 | Table of Content | 1 | Navigate the spec, locate a pattern, trace inter-section dependencies. |
| 03 | Preface | 17 | Onboard: reading paths by role, FPF philosophy, purpose and non-goals. |
| 04 | Part A — Kernel | 19 | Decompose and assign: holons, bounded contexts, roles, transformers, method/work separation. |
| 05 | A.IV.A — Signatures | 22 | Set boundaries: classify statements as definitions, gates, duties, or evidence. |
| 06 | A.V — Principles | 33 | Prevent confusion: category errors, measuring, comparing, evidence graphs, mechanism suite, flow constraints, gate profiles. |
| 07 | Part B — Reasoning | 25 | Compose and evaluate: structure and structural views (STRUCT-CAL), aggregation (Gamma), trust scores, emergence, reasoning cycles. |
| 08 | Part C — Extensions | 49 | Score and search: epistemic quality (F-G-R), kinds, measurement, decision theory, open-ended search, problem typing, discipline composition, agentic tool-use, quality bundles, quantum-like modeling, temporal and causal reasoning, mathematical lens adequacy, architecture description adequacy. |
| 09 | Part D — Ethics | 1 | Resolve conflicts: ethical trade-offs, bias auditing, safety overrides. |
| 10 | Part E — Constitution | 0 | Entry point for Part E subsections. |
| 11 | E-I — Constitution | 42 | Govern and publish: 11 Pillars, guard-rails, multi-view publication (MVPK), surface discipline, comparative reading, transduction graph, pattern quality gates, quality improvement loop, discoverability discipline. |
| 12 | Part F — Unification | 0 | Entry point for Part F subsections. |
| 13 | F.I — Meaning | 19 | Align vocabulary: semantic drift, homonym collisions, Alignment Bridges. |
| 14 | UTS Layout A | 0 | Map concepts across standards (BPMN, PROV-O, ITIL). |
| 15 | UTS Layout B | 1 | Map concepts across disciplines (operations, physics, math). |
| 16 | Part G — SoTA Kit | 15 | Harvest disciplines: SoTA Packs, TraditionCards, OperatorCards, benchmarks. |
| 17 | Part H — Glossary | 0 | Look up terms: canonical definitions, four-register naming, cross-references. |
| 18 | Part I — Annexes | 1 | Walkthroughs, change log, external standards mappings. |
| 19 | Part J — Indexes | 1 | Concept-to-pattern, pattern-to-example, principle-trace indexes. |
| 20 | Part K — Lexical Debt | 3 | Fix terminology: mandatory replacements and migration debt. |
npx claudepluginhub codealive-ai/ai-driven-development --plugin ai-driven-developmentApplies structured reasoning to complex coding problems using 19 analytical frameworks, 12 bias detectors, 10 decomposition methods, 10 mental models, Cynefin classification, ethical checks, and communication patterns.
Routes coding, architecture, product, and strategy problems to the right mental model (e.g. 5 Whys, Systems Thinking, Theory of Constraints). Use when unsure which framework fits.
Challenges assumptions, applies mental models like SWOT, first principles, and inversion, and structures reasoning to sharpen decisions and solve complex problems.