Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →When a solution seems impossible and the path forward is blocked — the antidote to any roadblock or wall. Refuses to take no for an answer: classifies what kind of "no" you actually hit, then runs targeted lateral-thinking techniques (assumption autopsy, inversion, first principles, constraint toggling, analogical transfer, and more from a 10-technique inventory) until the wall cracks or is proven load-bearing. Generates a minimum of 10 angles before evaluating any. AGENTS: use this on yourself
.claude/skills/coreyhaines31-unstuck/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 18% | 0% |
| case-03 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 21% | 0% |
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 93% | 0% |
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 135% | 0% |
| case-12 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 58% | 0% |
Turns "impossible" into angles. Classifies the wall, runs the right lateral-thinking techniques against it, and doesn't stop at the first mediocre workaround. Output is either a set of viable angles with next actions — or an honest "this wall is load-bearing, reroute the goal."
Two modes:
"Impossible" is a claim, not a fact. It almost always decompiles into something weaker: expensive, against the rules, nobody's done it, I don't know how. Only actually impossible (physics, math, arithmetic) ends the session — and it ends it honestly.
| Wall type | What "impossible" actually means | Lead techniques (see references/techniques.md) | |---|---|---| | Assumption | An inherited belief nobody re-verified | T1 assumption autopsy, T3 first principles | | Framing | The goal is stated in a way that excludes the answer | T4 altitude shift, T2 inversion, T5 work backwards | | Gatekeeper | A person/org said no | T10 interrogate the no, T6 analogical transfer | | Tool/tech | "X doesn't support Y" | T9 SCAMPER (substitute the primitive), T6 analogical transfer | | Resource | Not enough time/money/people | T7 constraint toggling, T8 provocation | | Physics/math | Actually impossible (rare) | Honest exit — reroute the goal, the wall is load-bearing |
Get from the user (one structured message, don't round-trip):
If the user says "I've tried everything," ask for the list. "Everything" is usually 2–3 things.
Use the taxonomy above. State the classification and why. Two rules:
Run T1 from references/techniques.md regardless of wall type: enumerate every assumption embedded in the problem statement, mark each verified fact vs inherited belief, and attack the beliefs. Most walls die here — the ones that don't are at least correctly framed for Step 4.
Pick 2–3 more techniques by wall type (lead techniques in the table; full triage guidance in references/techniques.md). For each, generate 2–3 angles.
Rules of generation:
Sort every angle into:
/deep-research/decide.Archives live in ${MAKERSKILLS_CONFIG:-$HOME/.config/makerskills}/unstuck/archive/ (create the directory if missing). Never write archives inside the skill's own folder — skill installs and upgrades re-sync from source and wipe anything saved there.
Write to <archive dir>/<YYYY-MM-DD>-<slug>.md:
markdown# Wall: <one-line> **Date:** YYYY-MM-DD **Invoked by:** user | agent **Wall type:** assumption / framing / gatekeeper / tool / resource / physics **Goal it blocked:** <one line> ## The wall as stated <verbatim> ## The wall decompiled <restated without "impossible"> ## Assumptions attacked - <belief> → <held / broke> ## Techniques run T1, T4, T7 — <one line on what each surfaced> ## Angles (all of them) 1. <angle> — try now / research / wild / dead 2. … ## Committed **<the angle(s) chosen>** — next action: <concrete step> (or: "Wall is load-bearing — rerouted goal to <X>") ## Outcome (fill in later) <did the angle work?>
Append to <archive dir>/INDEX.md (create if missing):
markdown- 2026-07-14 — [<wall>](./<filename>.md) — <type> — **<committed angle or "rerouted">**
Over time this becomes a pattern library: grep it to learn which techniques actually crack your walls, and which wall types recur (a recurring wall is usually one unexamined assumption upstream).
For when YOU (the agent) hit the wall mid-task. Trigger condition: an API/tool doesn't support what's needed, an approach has failed twice, or you notice a "that's not possible," "unfortunately," or "the only option is" sentence forming in your response.
Before reporting a dead end to the user, run inline (no interactive capture — you already have the wall in context):
Invoked by: agent) when the wall was nontrivial — skip archiving for sub-minute walls.The success metric: the user stops seeing dead-end reports without tried-angles receipts.
decide — downstream: 2+ mutually exclusive viable angles become a /decide fork. Upstream: decide's Q19 ("what missing info would change it?") can route here when the missing thing is an option, not information.deep-research — "needs research" angles route there; the brief comes back and re-enters Step 5.business-brainstorm — its "angle to steal" move on Kill verdicts is this skill applied to business ideas.pm — a committed angle becomes a board task.second-brain — archive entries can compile into a "walls I've broken" wiki page.| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-04 | pass→pass | 16,823 | 20,958 | +25% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,818 | 5,421 | +92% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | 24,999 | 27,970 | +12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,630 | 6,476 | +78% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | 35,780 | 25,344 | -29% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 5,251 | 6,201 | +18% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→pass | 34,333 | 24,965 | -27% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 5,115 | 6,176 | +21% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | 14,924 | 17,938 | +20% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,565 | 5,265 | +105% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 19,632 | 18,425 | -6% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,386 | 5,659 | +67% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | 20,187 | 29,360 | +45% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,551 | 6,846 | +93% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | 16,636 | 23,672 | +42% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,587 | 6,067 | +135% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 16,235 | 13,699 | -16% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,363 | 4,223 | +79% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | pass→pass | 22,820 | 26,273 | +15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,264 | 6,450 | +98% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→fail | 5,827 | 7,882 | +35% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 910 | 3,638 | +300% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | 13,774 | 6,358 | -54% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,175 | 3,427 | +58% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 14,755 | 19,730 | +34% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,229 | 5,435 | +144% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→fail | 12,351 | 7,912 | -36% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,777 | 3,606 | +103% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→pass | 16,537 | 21,131 | +28% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,392 | 5,596 | +134% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 12,720 | 5,590 | -56% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,857 | 3,155 | +70% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 13,210 | 9,744 | -26% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,924 | 3,724 | +94% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 11,232 | 23,150 | +106% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,722 | 5,872 | +241% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→pass | 8,897 | 6,307 | -29% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,353 | 3,293 | +143% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 9,832 | 9,153 | -7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,523 | 3,736 | +145% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | fail→pass | 10,944 | 15,374 | +40% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,530 | 4,541 | +197% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 7,899 | 3,887 | -51% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,253 | 2,959 | +136% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-23 | fail→pass | 8,283 | 2,782 | -66% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,151 | 2,729 | +137% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-24 | fail→pass | 12,849 | 10,775 | -16% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,893 | 3,905 | +106% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 24 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +38 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 24 comparable cases. 1 case got worse with the skill loaded, and it is included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.