Install
$ agentstack add skill-viktorbezdek-skillstack-creative-problem-solving ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Creative Problem-Solving
Generate breakthrough solutions using structured creativity techniques matched to problem type. Forward-looking, divergent thinking — complements critical-intuition (backward-looking, convergent).
When to Use / Not Use
Use when:
- Conventional approaches have failed and you need fresh thinking
- Breaking through mental blocks on a project
- Strategic decisions involving competitors, stakeholders, or incentive dynamics
- First-principles analysis of whether the problem itself is the right one to solve
- Generating diverse alternatives with trade-offs
Do NOT use when:
- Analyzing or critiquing existing ideas -> use
critical-intuition - Detecting bias in evidence or proposals -> use
critical-intuition - Making a final decision between known options -> use
prioritization - Pattern recognition in data -> use
critical-intuition
Decision Tree
What type of problem are you solving?
├── Stuck in conventional thinking / mental block
│ └── Lateral Thinking -> random entry, provocation, escape assumptions
├── Need systematic exploration of solution space
│ └── SCAMPER + Morphological Analysis -> structured ideation
├── Strategic or competitive problem
│ ├── Incentives/misaligned actors -> Game Theory -> Nash equilibrium, incentive alignment
│ └── Fundamental constraints -> First Principles -> question everything assumed
├── Organizational/team dynamics
│ └── Systems Thinking -> feedback loops, leverage points, second-order effects
├── Choosing between generated options
│ └── Decision Frameworks -> expected value, Pareto optimization, reversibility test
└── Need to evaluate existing ideas, not generate new ones?
└── Use critical-intuition instead
Five-Step Process
Step 1: Deep Understanding
Extract the real problem beneath the stated one:
- What is the stated problem vs. the underlying goal?
- What constraints are real vs. assumed (ghost constraints)?
- Who are the stakeholders and what do they want?
- What happens if we do nothing?
Challenge assumptions explicitly. List all implicit assumptions and question which can be removed.
Step 2: Strategic Reframing
View the problem through multiple lenses before solving:
- Abstraction shifts: Chunk up (broader purpose), down (specific components), sideways (analogies)
- Perspective rotation: Different stakeholders, time horizons, scales
- Constraint manipulation: What if fixed constraints were variable?
- Inversion: How would we guarantee failure? What would make this worse?
For techniques, read references/reframing-techniques.md.
Step 3: Solution Generation
Generate diverse solutions using matched creativity techniques:
| Problem Type | Technique | Reference | |---|---|---| | Mental blocks | Random entry, provocation, escape assumptions | references/lateral-thinking.md | | Systematic exploration | SCAMPER, morphological analysis, cross-domain transfer | references/ideation-techniques.md | | Strategic innovation | Game theory, first principles, systems thinking | references/strategic-frameworks.md |
Step 4: Solution Analysis
Evaluate generated solutions with strategic frameworks:
- Probabilistic: Expected value, base rates, Bayesian updating, tail risk
- Game theory: Nash equilibrium, incentive alignment, strategic commitment, backwards induction
- System dynamics: Feedback loops, leverage points, second-order effects, time delays
For frameworks, read references/strategic-frameworks.md.
Step 5: Decision & Recommendation
Synthesize into actionable recommendations:
- Primary recommendation with reasoning
- Key advantages (why this is superior)
- Critical risks (what could go wrong)
- Mitigation strategies
- Decision criteria (when to choose alternatives)
- First concrete implementation steps
Apply decision frameworks: expected value for uncertainty, Pareto for trade-offs, real options for flexibility, reversibility test for one-way vs. two-way doors.
For frameworks, read references/decision-frameworks.md.
Technique Selection Guide
| Signal | Use Technique | Why | |--------|--------------|-----| | "We've tried everything" | Lateral thinking + inversion | Break the pattern by forcing random connections | | "We need more options" | SCAMPER + morphological analysis | Systematically explore combinations | | "Competitors react to our moves" | Game theory | Map incentives and equilibrium outcomes | | "Why do we even do it this way?" | First principles | Strip to fundamentals and rebuild | | "Teams are blocking each other" | Systems thinking + game theory | Find incentive misalignment and leverage points | | "What's the best approach?" | Expected value + reversibility test | Quantify trade-offs and identify safe-to-reverse options |
Anti-Patterns
| Anti-Pattern | Problem | Solution | |---|---|---| | Skipping Step 1 (deep understanding) | Solutions address stated problem, not real need | Always extract: "What is the underlying goal?" and "What happens if we do nothing?" | | Jumping to a single "best" answer | Short-circuits divergent exploration; misses high-leverage unconventional options | Generate 5-10 alternatives before converging; ask for approaches with trade-offs, not "the answer" | | Not sharing what has already been tried | Skill regenerates solutions already rejected | Provide prior approaches and why each failed in your prompt | | Critiquing instead of generating | Asking "critique this plan" triggers analysis, not ideation | Use this skill for generating alternatives; use critical-intuition for critique | | Abstraction without grounding | Game theory analysis too abstract to map to concrete actions | Name specific actors, specific moves, specific payoffs; ground in real people and teams | | Skipping feasibility assessment | Generated ideas are inspiring but have no implementation path | Never skip Step 4 (analysis) and Step 5 (recommendation); every idea needs feasibility check | | Assuming constraints are real | Ghost constraints narrow solution space invisibly | Explicitly label each constraint as "verified" or "assumption" and challenge assumptions | | Creative thinking without rigor | Unconventional ideas fail in real-world strategic complexity | Always pair generation (this skill) with analysis (game theory, Bayesian reasoning, systems thinking) |
Input Requirements
What to include in your prompt for best results:
| Input | Why It Matters | |-------|---------------| | What you have already tried + why each failed | Prevents regenerating rejected solutions | | Real constraint vs. assumed constraint | Identifies ghost constraints to challenge | | Who the relevant actors are | Game theory needs named players with real incentives | | Your resources and advantages | Asymmetric strategy depends on knowing your strengths | | What "success" looks like | Enables expected value calculation and decision criteria |
Template prompt:
We have been trying to [solve problem] for [duration]. Approaches we've tried: [list each with why it failed]. The constraint we're working within: [describe, noting which are assumptions]. Our resources/advantages: [list]. Stakeholders involved: [who has influence]. Help me find approaches outside our current thinking.
Integration
- critical-intuition — Analytical counterpart: critique what this skill generates
- systems-thinking — Deeper systems dynamics for complex adaptive problems
- prioritization — RICE, MoSCoW, ICE scoring for ranking generated solutions
- risk-management — Systematic risk assessment for riskier creative solutions
- outcome-orientation — Define measurable success criteria using OKRs
References
references/lateral-thinking.md— Random entry, provocation, escape assumptions, concept fanreferences/strategic-frameworks.md— Game theory, first principles, systems thinkingreferences/reframing-techniques.md— Abstraction shifts, perspective rotation, constraint manipulationreferences/ideation-techniques.md— SCAMPER, morphological analysis, TRIZ principlesreferences/decision-frameworks.md— Multi-criteria analysis, expected value, bias mitigation
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: viktorbezdek
- Source: viktorbezdek/skillstack
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.