About first-principles-decomposer
first-principles-decomposer is a skill for reconsidering complex problems by identifying assumptions, reducing them to fundamental facts, and rebuilding a solution from those facts. It is intended for product and feature design, stalled problems, and new initiatives.
Key features
- 01Surfaces assumptions in an approach
- 02Breaks assumptions into fundamental facts
- 03Rebuilds solutions from verified fundamentals
- 04Uses an interactive, structured flow
- 05Connects with other analysis frameworks
Use cases
- 01Rethink a product or feature design
- 02Untangle a complex problem
- 03Challenge assumptions in an existing approach
- 04Develop a new project from fundamentals
Install
Copy the command and run it in a terminal.
npx skills add https:/ / github.com/ hanzoskill/ first-principles-decomposer --skill first-principles-decomposerAfter installing, type/first-principles-decomposerin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.
Bundled files
References and scripts installed along with SKILL.md.
.author_meta.jsonreferences/integrated-frameworks.mdframework.mdexamples.mdDetails
From the project READMEFirst Principles Decomposer
When To Use
- Designing new products or features
- Feeling stuck on a complex problem
- Existing solutions seem overcomplicated
- Need to challenge assumptions
- Starting any new project or initiative
The Process
Phase 1: Identify Assumptions
Ask: "What am I assuming to be true that might not be?" List every assumption embedded in the current approach.
Phase 2: Break to Atoms
For each assumption, ask: "What is the most fundamental truth here?" Keep asking "why?" until you hit bedrock facts.
Phase 3: Rebuild From Truth
Starting ONLY from verified fundamentals, ask: "What's the simplest solution that addresses the core need?"
Interactive Flow
When user invokes this skill:
- Clarify the problem (1-2 questions max)
- Surface assumptions - list what's being taken for granted
- Decompose to fundamentals - show the atomic truths
- Rebuild solution - construct from ground up
- Compare - show how this differs from conventional approach
Output Format
PROBLEM: [stated problem]
ASSUMPTIONS IDENTIFIED:
1. [assumption] → Challenge: [why this might be wrong]
2. [assumption] → Challenge: [why this might be wrong]
FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS:
• [bedrock fact 1]
• [bedrock fact 2]
• [bedrock fact 3]
REBUILT SOLUTION:
[New approach built only from fundamentals]
VS CONVENTIONAL:
[How this differs from the obvious approach]
Example Triggers
- "Break down our parent communication problem from first principles"
- "I want to rethink how we do [X] from the ground up"
- "What are we assuming about [problem] that might be wrong?"
Integration
This skill compounds with:
- inversion-strategist - After rebuilding from fundamentals, invert to find what would guarantee failure of the new approach
- second-order-consequences - Project downstream effects of implementing the rebuilt solution
- pre-mortem-analyst - Stress-test the rebuilt solution by imagining its failure
- six-thinking-hats - Apply all six perspectives to validate each fundamental truth identified
Skill Metadata
Created: 2026-01-06 Last Updated: 2026-01-06 Author: Artem Version: 1.0
See references/framework.md for detailed methodology See references/examples.md for Artem-specific examples See references/integrated-frameworks.md for Stanford Design Thinking + MIT Systems Engineering combo