From skills-for-humanity
Routes identity and values reasoning to the appropriate tool based on the situation. Use for mission alignment, character testing, or values clarification.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/skills-for-humanity:s4h-identityThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Applies identity and values reasoning to decisions and directions. Diagnoses what kind of identity work is needed and applies the right tool.
Applies identity and values reasoning to decisions and directions. Diagnoses what kind of identity work is needed and applies the right tool.
| You need to... | Tool |
|---|---|
| Ask what a person or organization of genuine integrity would do | character-testing |
| Test whether a decision is genuinely aligned with stated mission | mission-alignment |
| Surface the actual operative values revealed by decisions | values-clarification |
Framing check: Confirm the specific identity situation before routing. State what you've identified — the person or organization in question, the decision or situation triggering the identity question, and whether the concern is about integrity, mission drift, or revealed values — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:
Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the identity situation and what's at stake]. Is that right?"
Header: "Framing"
Options:
Gut says something is wrong but can't articulate it → character-testing
Worried a direction is drifting from core purpose → mission-alignment
Want to know what your decisions actually reveal about your values → values-clarification
Unclear → values-clarification; understanding actual values informs both mission alignment and character testing
After diagnosing which tool fits, use the AskUserQuestion tool to confirm direction. Construct the question dynamically to include your diagnosis:
Proceed based on their selection.
Asks what a person or organization of genuine integrity would do.
Describe the decision or situation. Now ask: what would someone you deeply respect — someone with genuine integrity and good judgment — do here? Not someone who optimizes outcomes, but someone whose character is beyond question. Where does that answer differ from your current direction? The gap between "what I'm doing" and "what a person of integrity would do" is the information.
Output: The integrity-baseline answer, the gap from the current direction, and what specifically would need to change to close it.
Tests whether a proposed decision is genuinely aligned with stated mission.
State the mission clearly. Now test the decision against it: (1) Does this serve the people/outcomes the mission is for? (2) Does this use the methods or principles the mission commits to? (3) Is the argument for doing this primarily mission-driven, or does it rationalize a departure for other reasons (revenue, convenience, opportunity)? Organizations drift from mission through a thousand individually defensible decisions.
Output: Mission statement tested against the decision. Alignment score. Whether the decision is genuinely on-mission, a legitimate expansion, or a rationalized departure.
Surfaces the actual operative values revealed by decisions.
Stated values are aspirational; operative values are revealed by decisions under pressure. Look at recent decisions — especially hard ones where something was sacrificed. What was traded? What was protected? What would never be compromised, and what has been compromised? The pattern reveals the actual hierarchy of values, which often differs from the posted list.
Output: Stated values vs. operative values comparison. The decisions that reveal the gap. The actual value hierarchy as demonstrated by behavior.
npx claudepluginhub human-avatar/skills-for-humanityGuides ethical decision-making by grounding choices in character and integrity rather than outcome-based calculation. Walks through a structured process of framing, character description, and divergence analysis.
Guides through difficult decisions using Naval Ravikant's heuristics. Activate when stuck on pros/cons lists, big choices, career pivots, or decision confusion.
Runs a structured multi-perspective deliberation system on any question, decision, or creative challenge, using distinct thinking archetypes.