ClawHub

Reinforced Thinking Mode

Other

Multi-round independent deep thinking. Each round produces complete, final-quality solutions. Non-iterative, no TODOs, no angle constraints—pure divergent thinking.

Install

openclaw skills install reinforced-thinking-mode

Reinforced Thinking Mode

When to Use

Activate when user needs deep, multi-angle analysis:

  • Keywords: "deep thinking", "multi-angle", "comprehensive evaluation", "design solution", "architecture planning"
  • Intent: Complex system design, strategic decisions, innovation, risk assessment

Complexity → Rounds:

  • Simple (factual, clear): 2-3 rounds
  • Medium (feature design, trade-offs): 4-5 rounds
  • Complex (architecture, strategy): 5-7 rounds
  • Wicked (undefined, conflicting): 7-10 rounds

Core Principle

N independent, complete thinking sessions—not iterative refinement.

Each round must be: "If this were the last round, I am completely satisfied."

Mental Model

✅ Think: "This is my only chance—give it everything"

❌ Never think: "I'll improve this next round"

Hard Constraints

File Access

  • Each round reads ONLY: problem.md + round_{i-1}.md (Round 1: only problem.md)
  • Never read other rounds' details

Forbidden Words

Never use in solution files: TODO, to be improved, next round, later, refine further

Information Gaps

  • Uncertain facts → Search immediately
  • Uncertain requirements → Ask user immediately
  • Never assume and continue

Execution Flow

Phase 1: Initialize

  1. Assess complexity → Determine rounds (simple 2-3, medium 4-5, complex 5-7, wicked 7-10)
  2. Create directory reinforced-thinking/
  3. Write problem definition problem.md: background, current state, core problem, constraints, success criteria

Phase 2: Iterate (Each Round)

For round X:

  1. Read files: problem.md + round_{X-1}.md (Round 1: only problem.md)
  2. Reset mindset: Think from a fresh angle, don't copy previous approach
  3. Choose angle freely: Overturn previous round if necessary
  4. Write solution round_X.md, including:
    • Independence declaration
    • Core insight
    • Solution design
    • Expected results
    • Risks and mitigations
    • Why solution is complete
  5. Self-review: Check for forbidden words, completeness, executability
  6. **If failed → Redo step 4
  7. Early termination check (round 2+):
    • Compare core approach and solution with previous round
    • If similarity > 70%, lack of innovation → Recommend early termination
    • Write termination recommendation in current round for user decision

Phase 3: Synthesize

  1. Read all rounds + problem.md
  2. Analyze unique value, conflicts, complements of each solution
  3. Red team review: Critical examination of each solution
    • Assumption flaws: What assumptions does the solution rely on? What if they fail?
    • Vulnerability risks: Potential loopholes or bypasses?
    • Failure modes: In what scenarios will it fail?
    • Adversarial testing: If someone deliberately sabotages, where is the weakest point?
  4. Generate final report final_report.md (including red team review conclusions)

Phase 4: Cleanup

Automatically delete intermediate files (problem.md, round_*.md), only keep final_report.md.

If retention needed, specify in), only keep final prompt.

Quality Assurance

Mandatory Redo Rules

If ANY of these conditions trigger, MUST redo current round:

  1. Contains forbidden words (TODO, to be improved, next round, later, refine further)
  2. Not final quality, needs "future supplements"
  3. Read files other than problem.md and round_{X-1}.md
  4. Solution incomplete

Checklist (Each Round)

  • Chose different angle from previous round
  • Did not copy previous solution
  • No forbidden words
  • If last round, I would be satisfied
  • All details included, can implement directly
  • Only read problem.md and previous round

Common Errors and Fixes

ErrorExampleFix
Carry context"Based on R1's UX and R2's tech..."Only write "Based on problem.md and R3's approach..."
Leave TODOs"Details next round"Give core design details now
Assume facts"Users probably want X"Search to confirm or ask user
Preset direction"Next round: security angle"Let each round choose freely
Iterative thinking"Improve on R1"Each round is independent, think from scratch
No details"See related docs"Write complete details directly in file

Best Practices

  • Divergent thinking: No angle matrix—choose any perspective freely
  • True independence: Only read problem.md + previous round, not all history
  • All-out each round: Don't hold back for "next iteration"
  • Transparency: Show chosen angle and reasoning in each round
  • Early termination: If 2 consecutive rounds lack innovation or similarity > 70% with previous round, recommend early termination