Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add konglong87/methodology-skills --skill first-principlesgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/konglong87/methodology-skillsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/konglong87/methodology-skills/first-principles)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/konglong87/methodology-skills/first-principles"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/konglong87/methodology-skills/first-principles/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/konglong87/methodology-skills/first-principles"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/konglong87/methodology-skills/first-principles.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00058 | $0.03137 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00029 | $0.01569 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00627 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00314 |
Grade A, and why
first-principles scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 8d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 364 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
第一性原理思维
前置协议
环境检测
# 检测当前项目信息
PROJECT_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown")
BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown")
COMMIT=$(git rev-parse --short HEAD 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown")
echo "PROJECT: $PROJECT_ROOT"
echo "BRANCH: $BRANCH"
echo "COMMIT: $COMMIT"
前置技能检查
benefits-from 检查(推荐但非必须):
# 检查 goal-oriented 工件
GOAL_ARTIFACT="memory/artifacts/goal-oriented/latest.json"
if [ -f "$GOAL_ARTIFACT" ]; then
echo "FOUND: goal-oriented artifact"
# 提取目标信息(使用 Read 工具读取)
# 在分析中参考目标上下文
else
echo "INFO: No goal-oriented artifact found"
echo "Consider running /goal-oriented first for better context"
fi
工件目录初始化:
# 确保工件目录存在
mkdir -p memory/artifacts/first-principles
用户意图确认
根据用户消息判断:
检查点:
- 用户面临的问题是否需要创新方案
- 是否需要打破既有假设和惯例
- 问题复杂度是否适合第一性原理分析
意图分类:
- 创新问题:需要从本质重新构建解决方案
- 性能优化:找到瓶颈的根本原因
- 技术选型:从根本上分析需求
- 架构设计:从本质出发设计系统
Overview
第一性原理是一种从最基础、最根本的真理或事实出发,重新构建问题解决方案的思维方式。它要求抛开现有假设、惯例或类比,直接追问"这件事的本质是什么?""最基本的构成要素是什么?",然后基于这些基础元素推导出新的可能性。
核心区别:
- 类比思维: 基于现有方案改进("别人怎么做,我也能怎么做")
- 第一性原理: 从本质重新构建("根本不需要这样做")
典型例子: 埃隆·马斯克思考火箭制造成本时,不是接受市场价,而是从原材料成本出发,得出自己制造更便宜的结论。
When to Use
适用场景:
- 复杂问题需要创新方案
- 常规方法失效,需要突破
- 需要打破既有假设和惯例
- 成本/效率需要根本性突破
- 技术选型、架构设计等关键决策
- 用户明确要求"从本质思考"
不适用场景:
- 简单的、已解决的问题
- 标准化的、成熟的做法
- 时间紧急,需要快速复用现有方案
The Process
digraph first_principles {
rankdir=TB;
"识别问题" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#e0e0e0"];
"拆解到基础元素" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#c8e6c9"];
"质疑假设" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#fff9c4"];
"重建方案" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#bbdefb"];
"验证可行性" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#f8bbd0"];
"保存工件" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#81c784"];
"识别问题" -> "拆解到基础元素";
"拆解到基础元素" -> "质疑假设";
"质疑假设" -> "重建方案";
"重建方案" -> "验证可行性";
"验证可行性" -> "识别问题" [label="不可行", style=dashed];
"验证可行性" -> "保存工件" [label="可行"];
}
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 8d ago First seen · 364 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A 13f8e7e51f76
first-principles is a skill published in the GitHub repository konglong87/methodology-skills (5 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 3,137 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
importing-a-codebase
Use when the repo holds real source code but no specs: the existing-codebase branch of setting-up-a-project, normally reached via that dispatcher, directly only when the situation is unmistakable. Not for empty workspaces (starting-a-new-project) or feature work in a specced project (brainstorming).
starting-a-new-project
Use when the workspace is empty — no code yet — and the user brings a raw idea: the brand-new branch of setting-up-a-project, normally reached via that dispatcher, directly only when the situation is unmistakable. Not for features in an existing project — use brainstorming instead.
todos
This chat has a shared, live TODO plan — your tasks for the conversation, which the user also edits. Read this skill and reach for the todo tools whenever a request takes more than a couple of steps. It covers the plan model (group = task, items = its steps; loose items are the user's lane), how to work it: propose…
writing-workflow-skills
Use when adding a new workflow skill to pi-thinkrail-workflow, changing an existing workflow skill's role, trigger, handoff, or structure, or checking a workflow skill against the workflow system's rules. Not for authoring general-purpose skills outside this package.
brainstorming
Use this BEFORE any creative or feature work: building a new feature, adding functionality, changing behavior, or making a nontrivial design decision. Turns the user's request into a validated design — recorded as a spec-graph task-spec — before any implementation. Do not skip this because a change looks small.
reviewing-changes
Use when a review package asks you to review a plan step's change set (todo.startReview): you are the REVIEWER, not the author. How to judge an agent-written diff, file findings with addreviewcomment, and settle with exactly one reviewverdict.