Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

thinking-socratic(苏格拉底式思维)

thinking-socratic 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

thinking-socratic 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 52,496。

总安装 558周安装 23GitHub Stars 46下载 182核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:thinking-socratic(苏格拉底式思维)
来源仓库:https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills
仓库路径:skills/thinking-socratic
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-socratic
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-socratic

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

苏格拉底式思维用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息。适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor 等宿主中快速定位候选结果。通过关键词或任务场景触发,结合来源仓库进一步核验用法。安装前需确认权限范围、维护状态及是否涉及联网或文件操作。

thinking-socratic 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

来源仓库内路径:skills/thinking-socratic

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinkin…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

thinking-socratic 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-socratic。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

thinking-socratic 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

thinking-socratic 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

thinking-socratic 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

thinking-socratic 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 558 次,近一周安装 23 次,下载 182 次,GitHub 46 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

thinking-socratic 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
thinking-socratic

苏格拉底式思维 · 本页

55846需要联网未明确通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Socratic Questioning

Overview

The Socratic Method, developed by the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates, uses systematic questioning to stimulate critical thinking and illuminate ideas. Rather than providing answers, it draws out knowledge by challenging assumptions and exploring implications.

Core Principle: Questions are more powerful than answers. The right question reveals what we don't know we don't know.

When to Use

  • Requirements gathering (understanding what stakeholders really need)
  • Debugging (tracing assumptions to find root causes)
  • Code review (understanding design decisions)
  • Coaching and mentoring (helping others reach insights)
  • Self-reflection (examining your own beliefs)
  • Evaluating proposals or designs
  • When someone says "obvious" or "everyone knows"

Decision flow:

Understanding seems shallow? → yes → APPLY SOCRATIC QUESTIONING
Assumptions unexamined?     → yes → APPLY SOCRATIC QUESTIONING
Root cause unclear?         → yes → APPLY SOCRATIC QUESTIONING

The Six Types of Socratic Questions

1. Clarification Questions

Purpose: Ensure clear understanding of the claim or concept

QuestionUse When
"What do you mean by X?"Term is ambiguous
"Can you give me an example?"Concept is abstract
"How does this relate to Y?"Connection unclear
"Can you rephrase that?"Statement is confusing
"What is the main point?"Discussion is scattered

Example:

"The system needs to be fast." → "What do you mean by 'fast'? What latency is acceptable?" → "Fast for whom? End users? Batch processes?"

2. Assumption-Probing Questions

Purpose: Expose underlying beliefs that may be unexamined

QuestionUse When
"What are we assuming here?"Conclusion seems too quick
"Is this always true?"Generalization made
"What if that assumption is wrong?"Testing robustness
"Why do we believe this?"Basis unclear
"What would have to change for this to be false?"Finding conditions

Example:

"We need microservices for scale." → "What are we assuming about our scale requirements?" → "Is it always true that microservices scale better?" → "What if a modular monolith could meet our needs?"

3. Reason & Evidence Questions

Purpose: Examine the support for a claim

QuestionUse When
"What evidence supports this?"Claim is asserted
"How do we know this?"Source unclear
"Are there other explanations?"Causation assumed
"What would prove this wrong?"Testing falsifiability
"Is this evidence sufficient?"Conclusion seems strong

Example:

"Users don't want feature X." → "What evidence do we have for this?" → "How many users did we ask? How were they selected?" → "Could there be other explanations for the feedback?"

4. Perspective & Viewpoint Questions

Purpose: Consider alternative angles and stakeholders

QuestionUse When
"How would X see this?"Single perspective dominates
"What's the opposite view?"No alternatives considered
"Who disagrees, and why?"Consensus seems too easy
"What are we not seeing?"Blind spots suspected
"How does this look from [role]?"Stakeholder impact unclear

Example:

"This API design is intuitive." → "How would a new developer view this?" → "What would someone from a different language background expect?" → "Who might find this confusing, and why?"

5. Implication & Consequence Questions

Purpose: Explore downstream effects and logical conclusions

QuestionUse When
"What follows from this?"Implications unexplored
"If this is true, what else must be true?"Testing consistency
"What are the consequences?"Impact unclear
"How does this affect X?"Ripple effects not considered
"What are the second-order effects?"Only immediate effects seen

Example:

"We'll add this field to the API response." → "What follows from adding this field?" → "How does this affect clients that don't need it?" → "What are the implications for backward compatibility?"

6. Questions About the Question

Purpose: Reflect on the inquiry itself; meta-level examination

QuestionUse When
"Why is this question important?"Purpose unclear
"What would answering this tell us?"Value of question unclear
"Is this the right question?"May be missing the point
"What question should we be asking?"Reframing needed
"Why are we asking this now?"Timing or priority unclear

Example:

"Which database should we use?" → "Why is this question important right now?" → "What would answering this tell us that we don't know?" → "Is the real question about database, or about data modeling?"

Application Patterns

For Requirements Gathering

Stakeholder: "We need a dashboard."
Clarification: "What decisions will the dashboard help you make?"
Assumptions: "What are we assuming about who will use this?"
Evidence: "What data shows this is the highest priority?"
Perspective: "How do different user roles need different views?"
Implications: "If we build this, what won't we build?"
Meta: "Is a dashboard the best solution, or is there another approach?"

For Debugging

Report: "The system is slow."
Clarification: "Which operations are slow? How slow?"
Assumptions: "What are we assuming about where the bottleneck is?"
Evidence: "What metrics/traces support this?"
Perspective: "Is it slow for all users or specific patterns?"
Implications: "If we fix this, what else might change?"
Meta: "Is 'slow' the right frame? Could it be 'inconsistent'?"

For Design Review

Proposal: "We should use event sourcing."
Clarification: "What do you mean by event sourcing in this context?"
Assumptions: "What are we assuming about our query patterns?"
Evidence: "What evidence suggests this fits our use case?"
Perspective: "How would ops view this? New team members?"
Implications: "What are the consequences for debugging? Storage?"
Meta: "Is the real question about event sourcing or auditability?"

Facilitation Tips

  • Genuine curiosity: Ask because you want to understand, not to trap
  • Follow the thread: Let answers guide next questions
  • Comfortable silence: Allow time for reflection
  • Non-judgmental tone: Questions should feel safe
  • Build on answers: "That's interesting. Can you say more about..."
  • Admit ignorance: "I don't understand. Help me see..."

Verification Checklist

  • Used questions from at least 3 of the 6 categories
  • Probed assumptions underlying the topic
  • Explored at least one alternative perspective
  • Examined implications and consequences
  • Reached deeper understanding than starting point
  • Documented key insights from questioning

Key Meta-Questions

  • "What do I think I know, and how do I know it?"
  • "What question am I not asking?"
  • "What would change my mind about this?"
  • "Who knows more about this than I do?"
  • "What's the question behind the question?"

Socrates' Reminder

"I know that I know nothing."

The goal is not to prove others wrong but to discover truth together. The best questions reveal what everyone—including the questioner—doesn't yet understand.

平台分布

Codex

37.04%
按下载量换算67

Claude

31.44%
按下载量换算57

Cursor

18.81%
按下载量换算34

Gemini CLI

10.01%
按下载量换算18

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills