assistant-clarify

Clarify ambiguous or multi-intent requests. Use when the user asks to untangle, structure, or restate what they mean.

SKILL.md

GitHub

Clarification Workflow

Use this when the user's message is hard to execute safely because it is fragmented, multi-intent, or underspecified.

Do not tell the user their prompt is "chaotic." Treat it as a normal collaboration problem: extract signal, reduce ambiguity, and keep momentum.

Available Tools

Tool File When to use
Chaotic Prompts chaotic-prompts.md User intent is compressed, mixed, or partially implicit.
Research Notes research-notes.md Need the psychology rationale behind the workflow.

Contracts

Read and follow these contracts before running the clarification workflow.

Contract File Purpose
Input contracts/input.yaml Required context to resolve before clarifying a request.
Output contracts/output.yaml Required artifacts to produce before proceeding with execution.

This is a Utility skill. It has no phase gates or sub-agent handoffs.

Goal

Turn ambiguous, multi-intent, or underspecified prompts into a concise execution brief without shaming the user or stalling clear work. Preserve momentum with evidence-backed defaults when ambiguity does not materially change the next action. Reversibility alone, convention, or a plausible preference does not establish user intent.

Success Criteria

  • The likely goal, deliverables, constraints, and unknowns are separated.
  • Clarifying questions cover every material, non-discoverable decision that lacks a safe default; they are grouped by topic and are not numerically capped.
  • Each question includes a recommended default when a safe default exists.
  • The next execution target is explicit once ambiguity is reduced.
  • If evidence-backed safe defaults are enough, status is ready_to_execute and execution may proceed without asking ritual questions.
  • A proposed product choice requires a question and an explicit user answer before dependent work proceeds; a recommendation is not an answer.

Constraints

  • Ask only when guessing would materially change correctness, scope, priority, safety, or user-visible output.
  • Do not ask ritual questions when the prompt already contains enough signal to proceed.
  • Preserve the user's wording and intent; do not reframe into a different task.
  • Preserve evidence-backed existing behavior and justified technical defaults, but do not infer product intent from reversibility, convention, or plausibility alone.
  • For proposed product choices, ask and wait for an explicit user answer before dependent work; do not treat a recommended default as consent.
  • Prefer a single decision, bounded choices, and a recommended default over open-ended interrogation. Keep each interaction concise and goal/file-oriented, but do not suppress material questions to meet an arbitrary count.
  • Treat company/security constraints as real blockers: do not ask for secrets or request unapproved external sharing as a clarification shortcut.

Decision Rule: Ask or Act

Before asking, classify the ambiguity:

  • Safe default: the interpretation is supported by the user's stated intent, conversation context, applicable policy, or relevant existing behavior, and it does not decide a material product question. A justified technical default may fill implementation details. Reversibility alone, convention, or a plausible preference does not establish user intent.
  • Bounded choice: plausible paths would materially change the outcome. Ask concise, grouped questions for all currently material decisions. For proposed product choices, wait for the user's explicit answer before dependent work; a recommendation is not consent.
  • Material blocker: action could be wrong, unsafe, destructive, policy-violating, or expensive. Stop and ask.

Default to action for low-risk discovery steps such as reading local files, inspecting existing project docs, or drafting a provisional brief.

Usage

Read chaotic-prompts.md when any of these are true:

  • Multiple asks are mixed together without priorities
  • Goals, deliverables, or constraints are implied rather than stated
  • The message jumps between symptoms, solutions, and decisions
  • References like "it", "that", or "the thing" do not resolve cleanly
  • The safest next step is a short Q&A instead of guessing

Output

Return:

  1. Interpretation - the user's likely goal in one or two sentences.
  2. Structured brief - knowns, unknowns, assumptions, constraints, and likely deliverables.
  3. Clarifying questions - every material question, grouped by topic; each states why it matters, risk if guessed, and a default or none. Use an empty list when ready to execute.
  4. Execution target - the confirmed next action once ambiguity is reduced, or the blocker if it is not.
  5. Status - ready to execute, needs clarification, or blocked.

Stop Rules

  • Stop and ask only when the next action would be meaningfully different depending on the answer.
  • Stop after presenting clarification questions only when status is needs_clarification or blocked.
  • If the request becomes clear during analysis, proceed with the execution target instead of continuing to clarify.