Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →What might the future look like — construct multiple future scenarios, assess research approach robustness under different assumptions
.claude/skills/yogsoth-ai-scenario-planning/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-12 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 9% | 0% |
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 1% | 0% |
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -36% | 0% |
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -49% | 0% |
| case-09 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -25% | 0% |
Before launching this campaign, verify:
If any gate fails, STOP and resolve before proceeding.
Construct a portfolio of plausible future scenarios spanning the uncertainty space, then assess how robust our research approach is under each scenario. The output is a robustness index plus contingency triggers that tell us when to pivot.
| Strategy | Question | When to Use | |----------|----------|-------------| | morphological-scenario | What are all possible combinations? | Systematic enumeration of all factor combinations needed | | narrative-scenario | What is the story of each future? | Rich qualitative understanding of scenario dynamics needed | | stress-scenario | What is the worst case? | Risk assessment and failure preparedness needed | | competitive-scenario | What will competitors do? | Competitive landscape awareness needed | | temporal-scenario | How does it evolve over time? | Technology evolution and timing decisions needed |
| Component | Token Budget | Subagent Calls | |-----------|-------------|----------------| | Driver identification | 8K | 1 | | Parameter enumeration | 10K | 1 | | Consistency filtering | 15K | 2 | | Narrative construction | 12K per scenario | 1 per scenario | | Impact assessment | 10K per scenario | 1 per scenario | | Robustness scoring | 8K | 1 | | Synthesis | 12K | 1 | | Total (5 scenarios) | ~130K | ~15 |
A successful campaign produces at minimum:
研究过程经 context-management 落盘,与最终报告分属不同文件:
scenario-planning,建立本 campaign 的过程 context 文件。init 幂等——同 Phase 重入返回原文件。
strategy 的过程与中间产出 append 进上一步的过程文件。
另起 scenario-planning-report 文件落盘(见该 SOP)。
<!-- BEGIN available-tables (generated) -->
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| Strategy | When to use | | --- | --- | | competitive-scenario | What will competitors do? — Competitive method progress prediction and time window analysis | | morphological-scenario | What are all possible combinations? — Zwicky Box construction with CCA consistency filtering for systematic scenario enumeration | | narrative-scenario | What is the story of each future? — Shell method narrative construction for rich qualitative scenario understanding | | stress-scenario | What is the worst case? — Extreme condition construction and failure mode enumeration for risk preparedness | | temporal-scenario | How does it evolve over time? — Short/medium/long-term timeline projection with technology maturity curves |
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| SOP | When to use | | --- | --- | | context-checkpoint | Append research process and results to the current Phase's context file. Covers both process and results with genuine substance. Use this skill at plan-designated checkpoint points — typically after each strategy completes or at key decision nodes within a research Phase. | | context-init | Create a new context file for a research Phase. Called once at Phase start to initialize the file that subsequent context-checkpoint calls will append to. Use this skill whenever a new research Phase begins and a fresh context file is needed. | | experiment-execution-paper-overview | Import SOP: paper landscape scan (from literature-engine skill) | | experiment-execution-paper-research | Import SOP: paper full-text reading (from literature-engine skill) | | experiment-execution-paper-search | Import SOP: paper AI summary reading (from literature-engine skill) | | experiment-execution-quality-gate-check | Shared SOP: verify quality gate criteria are met before proceeding | | experiment-execution-saturation-detection | Shared SOP: detect information saturation — know when to stop searching/analyzing | | experiment-execution-web-research | Import SOP: deep full-page content analysis (from web-browsing skill) | | experiment-execution-web-search | Import SOP: quick web scan discovery (from web-browsing skill) | | scenario-synthesis | Comprehensive scenario analysis report synthesizing all scenario work |
<!-- 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-01 | fail→fail | 52,578 | 25,015 | -52% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 7,429 | 1,900 | -74% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 50,894 | 19,407 | -62% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 6,880 | 1,995 | -71% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | 10,972 | 3,905 | -64% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,744 | 1,909 | +9% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 47,233 | 19,583 | -59% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 6,554 | 1,939 | -70% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | pass→pass | 20,373 | 12,376 | -39% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,049 | 2,527 | -17% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | 22,648 | 12,356 | -45% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,493 | 2,527 | +1% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 18,438 | 11,787 | -36% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,526 | 3,078 | +22% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 20,737 | 14,467 | -30% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,441 | 3,442 | +41% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | 41,726 | 8,447 | -80% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,915 | 1,857 | -36% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | 26,033 | 7,817 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,299 | 1,671 | -49% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | 28,479 | 8,666 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,592 | 2,704 | -25% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 14,537 | 8,246 | -43% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,427 | 1,704 | +19% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | 20,658 | 11,934 | -42% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,422 | 2,488 | +3% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 19,148 | 11,596 | -39% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,126 | 2,250 | +6% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 12,845 | 7,789 | -39% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,952 | 1,655 | -15% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→pass | 20,881 | 18,441 | -12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,966 | 4,129 | +39% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | 52,894 | 9,202 | -83% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,779 | 1,941 | -30% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 19,360 | 10,389 | -46% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,057 | 2,067 | +0% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | 17,490 | 10,422 | -40% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,857 | 2,122 | +14% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | 24,782 | 21,185 | -15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,043 | 3,895 | +28% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 10,870 | 13,058 | +20% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,652 | 2,459 | +49% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | 17,977 | 47,886 | +166% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,970 | 9,195 | +210% | 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. 22 cases were attempted, and 17 counted toward the lift figure. The other 5 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 +50 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 17 comparable cases. 2 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.