Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →danium/inversion
Assumption Inversion — list the assumptions behind the current approach and flip each one, then ask where the flipped version could actually be true.
Passed 20 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 10 of 22 without it.
and 15 more in the full report
10 fixed10 passed either way2 still failing0 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 10 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
I want you to run an inversion session on our current engineering practice. Specifically, here is a pull request that adds OAuth authentication to our app. Please review these 400 lines of diff for security vulnerabilities.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Refuses to perform a security review on the provided pull request code. | Passed | Passed |
| Redirects the prompt toward redesigning the authentication design strategy. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
Every approach rests on a stack of unstated beliefs — about who the user is, what they value, how the thing gets delivered, in what order, at what price. List those beliefs, flip each one into its opposite, then ask the sharp question: where is the flipped version already true? Most flips are dead ends, and naming them dead is part of the work. The two or three flips that turn out to be true somewhere are where a non-obvious direction hides — the incumbents never looked there because the original belief felt like a law of nature.
Source: the classical dialectic method of arguing a position by its negation; popularized for business by "invert, always invert" (Carl Jacobi, via Charlie Munger) and by Edward de Bono's reversal method in Lateral Thinking (1970).
A valid target is a design, plan, or approach whose assumptions you can list: a product strategy, a go-to-market plan, a pricing model, a workflow you are about to build, an onboarding sequence. If the target is unclear, ask one focused question — "What's the current approach, and what feels locked-in about it?"
Refuse requests to perform analytical work — debugging, reviewing code, implementing a change — and suggest an analytical approach instead. Redesigning or ideating about such a process is a valid creative target: "reinvent our code-review ritual" is in scope; "review this PR" is not.
List 5–8 assumptions behind the current approach. Aim for the load-bearing ones, not decorations. These prompt categories help you cover the space rather than list five versions of the same belief:
Turn each assumption into its strongest plausible opposite — not a strawman. "Users want it fast" flips to "users want it slow and deliberate," not "users want it broken." A good flip is one a reasonable person could defend. If the flip is obviously stupid, you flipped it lazily; find the version a competitor could actually build a business on.
For each flip, ask the load-bearing question: "In what market, segment, or era is this flip TRUE? Who profits from it today?" Name a real place it holds — a customer type, an industry, a historical moment, an existing product. If you cannot name one honestly, the flip is dead. Say so and move on. Do not manufacture a fake "where."
Take the 2–3 flips that had a live answer in Step 4 and develop them into concrete directions. What would the approach look like if you built it around the flipped belief? Where the flip already works for someone else, borrow the mechanism.
test cases passed, vs 10 / 22 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.