cui-bonoWho actually benefits — and at whose expense? Power structure analysis for any domain: geopolitics, corporate behavior, institutional claims, media narratives. Use when (1) who benefits from X, (2) ownership or revolving doors, (3) are these sources independent or echoing one origin, (4) expert has
deep-investigation-protocolWhat is REALLY at stake here? And for whom?" - STOP. When the matter involves trustworthiness, purchasing decisions, "which is better or more reliable", brand comparisons, marketing claims, corporate behavior, "convince me otherwise", or post-purchase "was this good?" - USE THIS. For technical specs
dev-job-defense-tiesEvaluating a dev job, studio, or employer? Before taking it, screen who the work actually serves — is it military/defense behind civilian language, and is the buyer one your red line rules out? Runs cui-bono for the buyer-chain, then classifies by end-use and buyer-nationality against YOUR threshold
dialectic-spiralAm I agreeing because it SOUNDS right, or because it IS right? Recursive adversarial dialectic for testing any claim, finding, or synthesis against its own opposite. Use when convergence feels too easy, when findings need stress-testing, or when any research skill escalates to dialectic depth.
engage-the-disfavoredDid I judge this before reading it?" - Counter the valence reflex: a fact-based analysis whose conclusion favors a disfavored party (an adversary state, an accused figure, a label-discredited source) gets pre-discounted by provenance before its facts are engaged. Separate provenance from factual tru
frame-rotation「透镜」 What structure hides in my native grammar? Linguistic frame rotation to escape English-default pattern-recognition. Use when (1) pattern-recognition feels stuck in familiar grooves, (2) abstraction circles without grounding, (3) cross-domain insight feels like same-OS-different-domain, (4) trig
ground-level-triangulationWhat do the people with different stakes say, in their own languages?" - Map a contested geopolitical claim across language-publics with different, independent stakes: the implicated state's own primary documents, the affected party's language and nearest kin languages, non-official native voices, n
iterative-verificationIs this ACTUALLY verified, or did I just say it is?" - Factual accuracy verification loop. Use when (1) claims require evidence not assumption, (2) verification must be demonstrable, (3) single-pass investigation insufficient, (4) factual accuracy is critical. Provides the loop logic: iterate until
kernel-shellWhat part of this thesis is observation, and what part is story?" - Decompose a contrarian or heterodox thesis into atoms; classify each atom (observation / inference / intent-attribution / satellite); verdict each atom on its own evidence — never the thesis as a bundle. Use when (1) evaluating a th
label-function-analysisWhat is this label DOING?" - Unbundle a loaded label (extremist, denier, conspiracy theorist, apologist, shill) into observation, intent, mechanism, and actor; autopsy the debate axis the label enforces; run cui-bono on the label itself; test whether the replacement axis is falsifiable. Use when (1)
macro-monitorWhat is moving in the macro picture? Geopolitical/macro market indicators. Use when (1) China/US Treasury dynamics, (2) dollar-yield divergence, (3) Brent crude oil / energy price spikes, (4) geopolitical market risk, (5) one-command crisis check. NOT for stock analysis or fundamentals.
manufactured-confusion-detectionIs this fog organic, or engineered?" - Inverse of manufactured-consensus-detection: test whether noise, contradiction, and over-supplied mutually exclusive explanations around a claim are organic uncertainty or engineered to prevent ANY conclusion. Use when (1) every source tells a different story w
manufactured-consensus-detectionAre these sources agreeing independently, or echoing the same origin?" - When multiple sources converge on the same claim in similar language, test whether this is genuine independent agreement or coordinated messaging from a single origin. Use when (1) multiple independent sources say the same thin
researchWhere should I start investigating this? Routes research questions to the right methodology based on topic domain, depth needed, and available sources. Use when the research question spans multiple domains or the appropriate methodology is unclear. Not needed when a specific skill (DIP, cui-bono, yo
saturation-sweepWhat hasn't the sweep reached yet?" - Horizontal iteration in waves over declared branching axes (who else, where else, when else, who benefits elsewhere), with a novelty ledger per wave and a measured stop rule. Use when (1) an investigation risks stopping at the first coherent story, (2) "done sea
source-dossierWho is this source, structurally?" - Classify a source by four observable grounds (its own content over time; ownership and registries; declared self-positioning; dated case behavior) before weighing its claims, and keep an append-only per-source dossier across investigations. Use when (1) a source
source-omission-analysisWhat is everyone NOT saying about this?" - After any multi-source research sweep, analyze what each perspective is SILENT about. Omissions reveal structural position more reliably than statements. Use when (1) after completing multi-source research, (2) comparing coverage across ideological position
standpoint-passWho is most affected here, and what did the text do to them?" - Re-read primary material from the position of the most-affected, least-powerful party, and re-rank what matters by harm-to-the-many instead of offense-to-the-powerful. Use when (1) analyzing a speech, document, policy, or transcript who
substack-researchWhat are the independent voices actually saying? Extract and analyze long-form content from Substack publications. Use when (1) researching independent journalist perspectives, (2) analyzing a specific Substack publication, (3) building a research corpus from long-form written content, (4) cross-ref
text-deconstructionWhere does this text need what it excludes? Finds where texts undermine themselves on their own terms via close reading. Use when (1) analyzing arguments, policies, or frameworks claiming coherence, (2) something feels off but unnameable, (3) a framework presents itself as complete, (4) user asks wh
video-transcript-extractionHow do I get the transcript of this video? Platform-aware extraction for any video source — YouTube, local files, or other platforms. Use when (1) need to transcribe a video for analysis, (2) user provides a video URL, (3) building a knowledge base from video content. Provides multiple methods with
youtube-researchWhat do practitioners actually DO (not just document)? Methodology for extracting practitioner knowledge from YouTube video transcripts. Use when (1) researching how people actually use a technology, (2) seeking practitioner insights beyond documentation, (3) looking for tips, patterns, or workflows