/hyperthink#

Triple-perspective deep research engine. Triggered by /hyperthink.

Three agents — Optimist, Analyst, Critic — each produce a full deep-dive on every section. Their outputs are fact-checked, confidence-tagged, and synthesized into one authoritative document that reflects all three lenses without letting any one distort the whole.

Agent personas live in: agents/ (part of this skill package)

---

⚠️ Prerequisites#

This skill requires the interrogate skill to be installed. If it's not present, prompt the user:

"The hyperthink skill requires the interrogate skill. Install it first."

Check by looking for an interrogate skill in your skills directory before proceeding.

---

Pipeline Overview#

StageWhatHowOutputMax tokens1Master Brief + Persona VariantsOpus subagent (realtime)master-brief.md + persona-prompts/*.md16,000236 Parallel Deep-Dives (12 sections × 3 agents)Sonnet batch + Cron 2sections/{optimist,analyst,critic}/NN-title.md24,000 each3aTrifecta Audit — Analyst reviews all 3 per sectionSonnet batch + Cron 3aaudit/NN-title-trifecta.md (12 files)8,000 each3bUnified Synthesis NarrativeSonnet batch + Cron 3bsynthesis.md80,0004Executive BriefSonnet batch + Cron 4brief.md + brief.docx6,000

Estimated cost per run: ~$55–75 (batch discount on stages 2–4) Estimated time: 8–18 hours end-to-end Final delivery: brief.docx delivered via your configured channel when complete No checkpoints — fully automatic after trigger confirmation.

---

Model Configuration#

Stage 1: Opus ( anthropic/claude-opus-4-7 or your Opus alias — fall back to default if blocked) Stages 2–4: Sonnet ( claude-sonnet-4-6 or your Sonnet alias — fall back to default if blocked)

Check your model whitelist before running. Note in pipeline-state.json which model was used.

---

Storage#

All output written to a persistent directory. Create these before running:

bash

mkdir -p /data/hyperthink/[slug]/sections/optimist
mkdir -p /data/hyperthink/[slug]/sections/analyst
mkdir -p /data/hyperthink/[slug]/sections/critic
mkdir -p /data/hyperthink/[slug]/audit
mkdir -p /data/hyperthink/[slug]/persona-prompts

Full structure after a completed run:

text

/data/hyperthink/[topic-slug]/
  pipeline-state.json              # Stage tracking + all job IDs (source of truth)
  master-brief.md                  # Stage 1 Opus output
  persona-prompts/
    optimist-prompts.md            # 12 Optimist section prompts
    analyst-prompts.md             # 12 Analyst section prompts
    critic-prompts.md              # 12 Critic section prompts
  sections/
    optimist/
      01-[title].md                # 12 deep-dives, Optimist perspective
      ...
    analyst/
      01-[title].md                # 12 deep-dives, Analyst perspective
      ...
    critic/
      01-[title].md                # 12 deep-dives, Critic perspective
      ...
  audit/
    01-[title]-trifecta.md         # 12 trifecta comparison + audit docs
    ...
  synthesis.md                     # Stage 3b unified narrative (~50–80k words)
  brief.md                         # Stage 4 executive brief (~4–5k words)
  [slug]-BRIEF.docx                # Final brief deliverable
  [slug]-FULL.docx                 # Full synthesis as docx (on request)
  stage2-job.json                  # Batch job definitions (kept for reference)
  stage3a-job.json
  stage3b-job.json
  stage4-job.json

Store under /data/ if your setup persists that path across restarts (e.g. Railway volume mounts). Adjust the base path to match your environment.

---

Trigger Flow#

When user sends /hyperthink [optional topic]:

1. Check interrogate skill is installed — prompt to install if missing
2. Create output directories (see above)
3. Run interrogate flow — ask 4–10 questions in batches of 2 to narrow scope
4. Confirm scope summary — wait for explicit "yes"
5. From here: fully hands-off — no more checkpoints, no approvals needed

---

Interrogate Flow#

Ask in batches of 2, adapt based on answers. Minimum 4, maximum 10 questions.

Always cover:

• What is the core subject/concept?
• Primary goal: build it / understand it / evaluate it / compare options?
• Domain/context: tech, business, product, finance, legal, other?
• Known constraints: budget, tech stack, market, regulatory?
• Output focus: new project foundation / existing product / investment thesis / other?
• Is there a specific decision this should inform?

After answers → confirm scope summary → wait for "yes" → proceed to Stage 1.

---

Topic Slug Rules#

Lowercase, hyphens only, max 40 chars. If slug already exists in /data/hyperthink/, append -v2, -v3.

---

Stage 1 — Master Brief + Persona Variants#

Model: Opus (fall back to default model if blocked) Method: sessions_spawn with your configured Opus model No checkpoint — proceed immediately to Stage 2 after completion.

Subagent task:#

text

Write the master reasoning brief for this research topic, then generate three
persona-specific prompt variants for the parallel deep-dive stage.

Topic: [TOPIC]
Scope: [SCOPE FROM INTERROGATE]
Goal: [GOAL]
Constraints: [CONSTRAINTS]

━━━ PART A — MASTER BRIEF ━━━

Write the master reasoning brief to /data/hyperthink/[SLUG]/master-brief.md.

The brief must contain:

1. THESIS — Central claim (5–8 sentences). Specific, testable.

2. CORE ASSUMPTIONS — All assumptions (tech, market, feasibility, regulatory).
   Label each: (a) established fact, (b) reasonable assumption, (c) uncertain bet.

3. KEY FACTS — 15–20 most important facts, figures, data points.
   Include sources/indicators where possible.

4. OPEN QUESTIONS — 8–12 genuinely unknown or debated questions.
   These are what the deep-dive sections must attempt to answer.

5. SECTION PLAN — Exactly 12 sections. For each:
   - Title
   - Precise scope (what it covers, what it excludes)
   - 5–7 key questions it must answer
   - How it connects to the thesis
   - What evidence or examples it should engage with
   - Which other sections it relates to

6. REASONING ANCHORS — 8–10 shared principles ALL sections must respect.
   These ensure internal consistency across the document.

7. KNOWN RISKS & FAILURE MODES — 5–8 ways this could go wrong.

━━━ PART B — PERSONA PROMPT VARIANTS ━━━

Using the master brief and section plan above, write three persona-specific
prompt FILES. Each file contains 12 section prompts — one per section —
deeply adapted to that persona's analytical lens.

The personas are defined in:
- [SKILL_DIR]/agents/optimist.md
- [SKILL_DIR]/agents/analyst.md
- [SKILL_DIR]/agents/critic.md

Read each persona file. Internalize the bias, tone, output style, and
behavioral rules for each one. The section prompts MUST produce radically
different outputs — not the same analysis with a different adjective at the top.

For each persona, write a file at:
- /data/hyperthink/[SLUG]/persona-prompts/optimist-prompts.md
- /data/hyperthink/[SLUG]/persona-prompts/analyst-prompts.md
- /data/hyperthink/[SLUG]/persona-prompts/critic-prompts.md

Each file must contain 12 labelled section prompts (SECTION 01 through SECTION 12).

Each section prompt must:
- Open with the full persona character declaration (3–5 sentences embodying the persona)
- Provide the standard section scope + key questions from the master brief
- Restructure the OUTPUT FORMAT to match the persona's style:
  - Optimist: lead with strongest path forward, action verbs, concrete first moves,
    opportunity framing, end each subsection with "what this unlocks"
  - Analyst: lead with precise question statement, structure as claims → evidence →
    confidence level, explicit assumptions labelled, tables where applicable,
    "X with Y% confidence because Z" framing, end with most defensible conclusion
  - Critic: lead with the strongest version of the idea being attacked, then surface
    hidden assumptions, structure as objections ranked Fatal/Serious/Minor, end with
    the single objection that would kill the plan
- Add 3–5 persona-specific bonus questions on top of the master brief questions
- Require word count target (8,000–12,000 words)
- Prohibit generic observations — every claim must be specific

Do NOT water down the personas. If the outputs look similar, the prompts failed.

━━━ AFTER WRITING ALL FILES ━━━

Return ONLY: "Stage 1 complete — master brief + 3 persona prompt files saved"
Do NOT return the file contents as a message.

After Stage 1 subagent returns:#

1. read master-brief.md to verify it exists
2. read each persona-prompts file to verify all 3 exist
3. Write pipeline-state.json → {"stage": "2-pending", "slug": "[slug]", "topic": "[topic]", "created_at": "[ISO]"}
4. Build stage2-job.json (see Stage 2 below)
5. Submit: python3 /path/to/batch-worker.py submit --job-file .../stage2-job.json
6. Capture Job ID + Batch ID from stdout
7. Update pipeline-state.json → {"stage": "2", "stage2_job_id": "...", "stage2_batch_id": "..."}
8. Create Cron 2 (see Cron Poller Pattern)
9. Notify user: "⚙️ Hyperthink started. Stage 1 done. 36 deep-dives now running — ETA 3–6h."

---

Stage 2 — 36 Parallel Deep-Dives#

36 batch requests: 12 Optimist + 12 Analyst + 12 Critic. max_tokens: 24,000 each. Model: Sonnet. Include "project": "hyperthink" in job JSON.

Request IDs: opt-s01 through opt-s12, ana-s01 through ana-s12, crit-s01 through crit-s12.

Job JSON structure:#

json

{
  "description": "Hyperthink Stage 2 — [TOPIC] — 36 deep-dives (Optimist / Analyst / Critic)",
  "model": "claude-sonnet-4-6",
  "max_tokens": 24000,
  "project": "hyperthink",
  "requests": [
    {
      "id": "opt-s01",
      "max_tokens": 24000,
      "messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "[MASTER BRIEF + OPTIMIST SECTION 01 PROMPT]"}]
    },
    ... (opt-s02 through opt-s12) ...
    {
      "id": "ana-s01",
      "max_tokens": 24000,
      "messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "[MASTER BRIEF + ANALYST SECTION 01 PROMPT]"}]
    },
    ... (ana-s02 through ana-s12) ...
    {
      "id": "crit-s01",
      "max_tokens": 24000,
      "messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "[MASTER BRIEF + CRITIC SECTION 01 PROMPT]"}]
    },
    ... (crit-s02 through crit-s12) ...
  ]
}

Per-request prompt structure:#

text

MASTER BRIEF (do not deviate from thesis, assumptions, or reasoning anchors):
[FULL CONTENT OF master-brief.md]

---

[FULL PERSONA SECTION PROMPT FROM persona-prompts/[persona]-prompts.md — SECTION NN]

Output file naming:#

• sections/optimist/01-[title].md through sections/optimist/12-[title].md
• sections/analyst/01-[title].md through sections/analyst/12-[title].md
• sections/critic/01-[title].md through sections/critic/12-[title].md

Title = slugified section title from master brief (e.g., 01-market-landscape.md).

When Stage 2 completes: write 36 files → build stage3a-job.json → submit Stage 3a → create Cron 3a → self-delete Cron 2.

---

Stage 3a — Trifecta Audit#

12 batch requests — one per section. Analyst reviews all three perspectives for each section. max_tokens: 8,000 each. Model: Sonnet.

Per-section audit prompt template:#

text

You are the Analyst. Your role: evidence-based, neutral, dispassionate.
Calibrated confidence. Show the math. Label assumptions. No cheerleading. No doom-casting.

You will review three perspectives on the same research section and produce a structured
trifecta comparison document.

━━━ MASTER BRIEF EXCERPT ━━━
[SECTION TITLE, SCOPE, AND KEY QUESTIONS FROM master-brief.md FOR THIS SECTION]

━━━ OPTIMIST'S ANALYSIS ━━━
[FULL CONTENT OF sections/optimist/NN-[title].md]

━━━ ANALYST'S OWN ANALYSIS ━━━
[FULL CONTENT OF sections/analyst/NN-[title].md]

━━━ CRITIC'S ANALYSIS ━━━
[FULL CONTENT OF sections/critic/NN-[title].md]

---

YOUR TASK: Produce a structured trifecta comparison document for Section [N]: [TITLE].

Structure:

## 1. SECTION THESIS
What is the central claim all three perspectives are engaging with?

## 2. OPTIMIST AUDIT
Review the Optimist's output claim by claim. For each significant claim:
- Rate confidence: 🟢 HIGH / 🟡 MEDIUM / 🔴 DISPUTED
- Brief justification (1–2 sentences)
Flag the 3–5 claims most likely to mislead if taken at face value.

## 3. ANALYST REFERENCE VIEW
Authoritative take (400–600 words). What does the evidence actually support?

## 4. CRITIC'S TOP OBJECTIONS
Top 5 objections ranked: 🔴 FATAL / 🟠 SERIOUS / 🟡 MINOR
Is each well-founded? What does the Analyst's evidence say?

## 5. NET ASSESSMENT
What a reader should take from this section (300–500 words).
What all three views agree on. Where they diverge. What remains uncertain.

## 6. SECTION KEY TAKEAWAYS (for synthesis use)
10–15 confidence-tagged bullets. Format:
- [🟢/🟡/🔴] [Claim] — [1-sentence justification]
These are the primary input to Stage 3b synthesis — make them precise and complete.

Word target: 3,000–5,000 words.

Output file naming:#

• audit/01-[title]-trifecta.md through audit/12-[title]-trifecta.md

When Stage 3a completes: write 12 audit files → build stage3b-job.json → submit Stage 3b → create Cron 3b → self-delete Cron 3a.

---

Stage 3b — Unified Synthesis Narrative#

One batch request. max_tokens: 80,000. Model: Sonnet. Input: master-brief.md + all 12 trifecta audit docs (~55k–105k tokens — within 200k limit). Target output: 50,000–80,000 words.

Synthesis prompt template:#

text

You are the editor and synthesizer for a major triple-perspective research report.
Three agents — Optimist, Analyst, Critic — each produced a full deep-dive on every section.
An Analyst-only audit has fact-checked the Optimist's claims and produced confidence-tagged
comparison documents for each section.

Confidence tags: 🟢 HIGH / 🟡 MEDIUM / 🔴 DISPUTED — use them inline throughout.

━━━ MASTER BRIEF ━━━
[FULL CONTENT OF master-brief.md]

━━━ SECTION 01 TRIFECTA AUDIT: [TITLE] ━━━
[FULL CONTENT OF audit/01-[title]-trifecta.md]

[... all 12 trifecta audit docs ...]

---

YOUR TASK — produce the unified synthesis document:

1. TITLE PAGE — title, date, methodology note (triple-perspective: Optimist / Analyst / Critic)
2. TABLE OF CONTENTS
3. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (1,500–2,000 words) — thesis, top 10 findings (confidence-tagged), top 5 insights, top 3 risks
4. METHODOLOGY NOTE (300–400 words) — how the three-agent approach works, how to read confidence tags
5. SYNTHESIS NARRATIVE (5,000–8,000 words) — connect all 12 sections into one coherent argument
6. FULL SECTIONS (12 total) — for each: intro (200–300 words) + Optimist/Analyst/Critic summaries + net assessment + key takeaways
7. CONFIDENCE MAP — table: per section, list top insights (🟢) and most disputed claims (🔴)
8. CONCLUSION (1,000–1,500 words) — 7–10 prioritized next steps
9. OPEN QUESTIONS REGISTRY — all open threads from all audits, grouped by theme

Word target: 50,000–80,000 words.
Format: clean markdown, H1/H2/H3 throughout.
Confidence tags embedded inline — not just in takeaways.

When Stage 3b completes: save synthesis.md → build stage4-job.json → submit Stage 4 → create Cron 4 → self-delete Cron 3b.

---

Stage 4 — Executive Brief#

One batch request. max_tokens: 6,000. Model: Sonnet. Input: synthesis.md (~60–80k tokens — within 200k limit). Target output: 4,000–5,000 words.

Brief prompt template:#

text

SYNTHESIS DOCUMENT:
[FULL CONTENT OF synthesis.md]

---

Write an executive brief of 4,000–5,000 words. Confidence tags (🟢/🟡/🔴) must appear
wherever the underlying evidence warrants them.

Structure:

## TL;DR (150–200 words)
Core problem, what the three-lens analysis revealed, single most important takeaway.

## What the Three Lenses Revealed (300–400 words)
Where all three agreed (high-signal). Where they sharply disagreed (the contested zone).
Which perspective proved most reliable and why.

## The Recommended Approach (400–500 words)
What to do, grounded in 🟢 HIGH-confidence findings.

## Top 12 Findings (400–500 words)
12 numbered findings. Each 2–3 sentences. Confidence-tagged. No generic observations.

## Top 5 Actions (Priority Order) (600–700 words)
What, why, effort estimate, expected outcome, confidence level for the outcome.

## The Critic's Unresolved Objections (200–300 words)
3 Fatal or Serious objections the synthesis did not fully resolve.

## What the Optimist Got Right (But Couldn't Prove) (150–200 words)
2–3 🟡 MEDIUM insights worth acting on as explicit bets, not facts.

## If You Do Nothing (75–100 words)
What happens in 6 and 12 months? Make it specific.

After Stage 4 completes:#

1. Save brief.md
2. Generate brief.docx: python3 /path/to/md2docx.py brief.md [slug]-BRIEF.docx
3. Generate [slug]-FULL.docx from synthesis.md (optional — on request)
4. Update pipeline-state.json → {"stage": "complete", ...}
5. Self-delete cron
6. Deliver brief.docx via your configured channel

---

Cron Poller Pattern (Mandatory for all stages)#

Same idempotent, self-terminating pattern for stages 2, 3a, 3b, 4.

Two-step cron creation:#

1. Create cron with CRON_ID=PENDING in payload
2. Immediately cron update with actual cron ID injected into payload

Poller payload — exact 9-step sequence:#

text

You are a hyperthink pipeline poller. Run these steps exactly.

━━━ STEP 0 — IDEMPOTENCY GUARD (always first) ━━━
Read: /data/hyperthink/[SLUG]/pipeline-state.json
If "stage" field is NOT "[CURRENT_STAGE]" → EXIT immediately. Do nothing.

━━━ STEP 1 — CHECK LOCAL STATE ━━━
Read: /path/to/batch-jobs/[JOB_ID]/state.json
If status == "complete" AND [OUTPUT_FLAG] == true → skip to STEP 4.
If status == "complete" AND [OUTPUT_FLAG] == false → go to STEP 3.
If status == "processing" or "pending" → go to STEP 2.

━━━ STEP 2 — POLL BATCH ━━━
Run: python3 /path/to/batch-worker.py poll
Re-read state.json. If still not complete → EXIT silently.

━━━ STEP 3 — EXTRACT OUTPUT ━━━
Read results.jsonl. Extract text from each result.
Write output files to /data/hyperthink/[SLUG]/.
Mark [OUTPUT_FLAG] = true in state.json.

━━━ STEP 4 — WRITE IDEMPOTENCY FLAG ━━━
Write pipeline-state.json: {"stage": "[NEXT_STAGE]-pending", ...}
Do this BEFORE submitting the next batch.

━━━ STEP 5 — BUILD + SUBMIT NEXT STAGE ━━━
Check if [NEXT_JOB_FILE].json already exists — if so, skip building.
Submit: python3 /path/to/batch-worker.py submit --job-file .../[NEXT_JOB_FILE].json
Capture Job ID + Batch ID.

━━━ STEP 6 — UPDATE PIPELINE STATE ━━━
Write pipeline-state.json: {"stage": "[NEXT_STAGE]", "job_id": "...", ...}

━━━ STEP 7 — SELF-DELETE THIS CRON ━━━
Call: cron action=remove jobId=[CRON_ID]
Cron ID: [CRON_ID]

━━━ STEP 8 — CREATE NEXT CRON ━━━
Create poller cron for stage [NEXT_STAGE].
Immediately update it with its own ID.

━━━ STEP 9 — NOTIFY ━━━
Send completion message via your configured channel.

Invariants:#

• pipeline-state.json stage transition written before next batch submission — always
• pipeline-state.json checked as STEP 0 — hard gate on exact stage string
• Job file never rebuilt if it already exists on disk
• Cron always self-deletes — if it fails, notify user with the cron ID to remove manually

---

pipeline-state.json Schema#

json

{
  "stage": "2 | 3a-pending | 3a | 3b-pending | 3b | 4-pending | 4 | complete",
  "slug": "topic-slug",
  "topic": "Full topic name",
  "created_at": "ISO timestamp",
  "stage2_job_id": "...",
  "stage2_batch_id": "...",
  "stage2_complete": true,
  "stage2_sections": 36,
  "stage2_completed_at": "...",
  "stage3a_job_id": "...",
  "stage3a_batch_id": "...",
  "stage3a_complete": true,
  "stage3a_sections": 12,
  "stage3a_completed_at": "...",
  "stage3b_job_id": "...",
  "stage3b_batch_id": "...",
  "stage3b_complete": true,
  "stage3b_word_count": 65000,
  "stage3b_completed_at": "...",
  "stage4_job_id": "...",
  "stage4_batch_id": "...",
  "stage4_complete": true,
  "stage4_word_count": 4500,
  "brief_docx": "/data/hyperthink/[slug]/[slug]-BRIEF.docx",
  "completed_at": "...",
  "last_error": null
}

---

Token & Cost Reference#

StageRequestsmax_tokens outEst. input tokensEst. cost (batch)1116,0005,000$2.50 (realtime Opus)23624,000 each9,000 each$35–453a128,000 each43,000 each$8–123b180,00058k–106k$8–12416,00060k–81k$2–3Total****~$56–75/run

Batch discount (50%) applies to stages 2–4. Stage 1 is realtime.

Context window note: Anthropic's 200k limit is INPUT only — output tokens are separate. Stage 3b worst-case input: ~106k tokens (well within limit). All stages verified safe.

---

Error Handling#

• Any batch failure → notify user immediately with stage + error message
• Stage 2 partial failure → notify, ask whether to retry failed sections or proceed
• Stage 3a partial failure → same
• Never silently swallow errors
• All partial results saved even on failure — work is never lost
• All errors written to pipeline-state.json → last_error field

---

Supporting Scripts#

This skill requires two supporting scripts. Spec files are included in scripts/ — have your AI implement them for your environment before running the pipeline.

scripts/batch-worker-spec.md → implement as batch-worker.py#

Handles Anthropic Batch API submission, polling, and result fetching.

• submit — send a batch job, save state locally
• poll — check pending jobs, download results when done, notify user
• status — print a summary table of all jobs
• stdlib only (no third-party packages except your notification layer)
• See spec for full API call sequences, storage layout, and state.json schema

scripts/md2docx-spec.md → implement as md2docx.py#

Converts Markdown to .docx — used to generate the final executive brief.

• Requires: pip install python-docx
• Handles all hyperthink output elements: H1-H4, bold/italic/code, bullets, numbered lists, code blocks, horizontal rules, and unicode confidence tags (🟢 🟡 🔴)
• See spec for exact styling, colours, fonts, and parsing logic

First-time setup:

1. Read scripts/batch-worker-spec.md → implement batch-worker.py in your workspace
2. Read scripts/md2docx-spec.md → implement md2docx.py in your workspace
3. Install python-docx: pip install python-docx
4. Update the batch submission paths in the cron pollers to match where you saved the scripts
5. Run /hyperthink — the skill handles the rest