First Principles Decomposer OpenClaw Skill - ClawHub
Do you want your AI agent to automate First Principles Decomposer workflows? This free skill from ClawHub helps with ai & llms tasks without building custom tools from scratch.
What this skill does
Break any problem down to fundamental truths, then rebuild solutions from atoms up. Use when user says "firstp", "first principles", "from scratch", "what are we assuming", "break this down", "atomic", "fundamental truth", "physics thinking", "Elon method", "bedrock", "ground up", "core problem", "strip away", or challenges assumptions about how things are done.
Install
npx clawhub@latest install first-principles-decomposerFull SKILL.md
Open original| name | description |
|---|---|
| first-principles-decomposer | Break any problem down to fundamental truths, then rebuild solutions from atoms up. Use when user says "firstp", "first principles", "from scratch", "what are we assuming", "break this down", "atomic", "fundamental truth", "physics thinking", "Elon method", "bedrock", "ground up", "core problem", "strip away", or challenges assumptions about how things are done. |
First 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