Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Apply CATWOE from multiple stakeholder viewpoints and reframing matrix to reveal aspects invisible from the dominant perspective.
.claude/skills/yogsoth-ai-multi-perspective-reframing/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -45% | 0% |
| case-01 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -44% | 0% |
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 59% | 0% |
| case-03 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 4% | 0% |
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 76% | 0% |
See the problem through multiple professional and stakeholder lenses.
| Base SOP | Target | ±10% Range | |----------|--------|------------| | web-search | 40 | 36–44 | | web-research | 15 | 13–17 | | paper-overview | 30 | 27–33 | | paper-search | 20 | 18–22 | | paper-research | 10 | 9–11 |
<HARD-GATE>
| SOP | Done | Target | % |
|-----|------|--------|---|
| web-search | ? | 40 | ? |
| web-research | ? | 15 | ? |
| paper-overview | ? | 30 | ? |
| paper-search | ? | 20 | ? |
| paper-research | ? | 10 | ? |
Budget Gate: OPEN/CLOSED (>=80% required to exit)
</HARD-GATE>Import: web-search, web-research, paper-overview, paper-search, paper-research Subagent: catwoe-analysis, reframing-matrix Shared: multi-stakeholder-simulation
Apply CATWOE from multiple stakeholder viewpoints, use reframing matrix (4 professional perspectives), identify which framings reveal aspects invisible from the dominant perspective.
<!-- BEGIN available-tables (generated) -->
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| Tactic | When to use | | --- | --- | | multi-worldview-comparison | Multi-worldview comparison — CATWOE from multiple perspectives, reframing matrix across professional lenses, identify overlooked framings. Reveals what single-perspective analysis misses. |
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| SOP | When to use | | --- | --- | | catwoe-analysis | Apply Checkland's CATWOE analysis from a specific stakeholder perspective to reveal how the problem looks from that viewpoint. | | deep-insight-multi-stakeholder-simulation | Simulate multiple stakeholder perspectives evaluating a research gap, method, or proposal. Identifies blind spots from single-perspective analysis. | | reframing-matrix | Reframe the problem from 4 professional perspectives to reveal what each discipline would focus on. |
<!-- END available-tables (generated) -->
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-08 | fail→pass | 49,394 | 13,358 | -73% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,609 | 1,436 | -45% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→pass | 19,157 | 17,758 | -7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,281 | 1,268 | -44% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | 30,139 | 18,572 | -38% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,894 | 3,003 | +59% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→pass | 15,671 | 7,734 | -51% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,029 | 1,067 | +4% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | 18,603 | 18,500 | -1% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 666 | 1,169 | +76% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | 16,358 | 24,498 | +50% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,756 | 1,020 | -42% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | 60,038 | 27,722 | -54% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,801 | 980 | -46% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→fail | 50,685 | 50,154 | -1% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,445 | 1,452 | +0% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 27,901 | 51,132 | +83% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,934 | 8,816 | +124% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 41,676 | 49,897 | +20% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,520 | 6,073 | +141% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | pass→pass | 19,979 | 37,888 | +90% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,279 | 2,631 | +15% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→fail | 32,373 | 11,847 | -63% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,400 | 1,797 | -25% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 34,481 | 74,577 | +116% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,439 | 2,145 | +49% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | 56,914 | 8,890 | -84% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,813 | 1,268 | -30% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→fail | 16,321 | 35,939 | +120% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,687 | 1,865 | +11% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→pass | 20,585 | 8,548 | -58% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,455 | 1,234 | -64% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | 23,249 | 13,205 | -43% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,149 | 1,212 | +5% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 20,378 | 13,114 | -36% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 594 | 1,161 | +95% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 19,029 | 9,040 | -52% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,398 | 1,320 | -45% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | 23,560 | 13,709 | -42% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 889 | 2,017 | +127% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | fail→pass | 23,275 | 15,660 | -33% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,624 | 2,297 | -12% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→fail | 20,517 | 23,945 | +17% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,380 | 1,670 | -30% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-23 | pass→fail | 28,845 | 26,336 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,087 | 1,775 | -57% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-24 | pass→fail | 23,360 | 50,503 | +116% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,803 | 8,808 | +132% | 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, and 17 counted toward the lift figure. The other 7 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +29 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 17 comparable cases. 5 cases got worse with the skill loaded, and they are 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.