Agent-almanac adaptic
git clone https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/i18n/caveman/skills/adaptic" ~/.claude/skills/pjt222-agent-almanac-adaptic-093592 && rm -rf "$T"
i18n/caveman/skills/adaptic/SKILL.mdAdaptic
Compose 5-step synoptic cycle. Achieve panoramic synthesis across multiple domains. Where sequential analysis produces compromise ("a little of each"), synoptic cycle produces integration — unified understanding holds all domains together and finds emergent whole.
When Use
- Problem genuinely spans 3+ domains and interactions between domains matter more than depth in any one
- Sequential analysis (polymath style) tried but synthesis feels like compromise rather than integration
- Existing approaches feel like "a little of each" rather than unified vision
- Before major architectural decisions affecting multiple stakeholders
- Domain experts disagree and resolution lies between their perspectives, not within any one
When NOT to Use
- Single-domain problems — use domain agent directly
- Well-understood trade-offs where polymath-style sequential analysis suffices
- Self-care or wellness contexts — use tending team instead
- Speed matters more than depth — full cycle requires sustained attention
Inputs
- Required: Problem or question requiring multi-domain synthesis
- Optional: Explicit list of domains to hold (default: auto-detect from problem context)
- Optional: Depth setting —
,light
, orstandard
(default:deep
)standard - Optional: Expression form —
,narrative
,diagram
, ortable
(default:recommendation
)auto
Configuration
settings: depth: standard # light (skip meditate), standard, deep (extended perceive) domains: auto # auto-detect or explicit list expression_form: auto # narrative, diagram, table, recommendation
Steps
Step 1: Clear — Empty Workspace
Run
meditate skill. Clear prior context, assumptions, single-domain bias.
- Execute full meditate procedure: prepare, anchor, observe distractions, close
- Pay special attention to domain bias — tendency to frame problem through whichever domain was most recently active
- Clear any premature solutions arrived before full picture visible
- If
set, abbreviate to brief context-clearing pause rather than full meditationdepth: light
Got: Workspace empty. No domain has priority. No solution pre-selected. Agent in neutral, receptive state ready to hold multiple perspectives together.
If fail: Particular domain keeps asserting itself as "real problem"? Name bias explicit: "I notice I am framing this as primarily a [domain] problem." Naming bias loosens its grip. Clearing fails entirely? Problem may genuinely be single-domain — reconsider whether synoptic cycle needed.
Step 2: Open — Enter Panoramic Mode
Run
expand-awareness skill. Shift from narrow focus to wide-field perception.
- Inventory all domains relevant to problem — do not pre-filter or rank
- For each domain, note its core concerns, constraints, values without evaluating
- Soften focus: hold all domains in awareness together rather than cycling through one at time
- Resist pull to "start solving" — this step purely about opening field of view
- Domains provided explicitly in inputs? Use those as starting set but remain open to discovering additional relevant domains
Got: Panoramic field open. All relevant domains held in awareness together. Agent senses full landscape without zooming into any single domain. Feeling spacious rather than overwhelming.
If fail: Domain list feels incomplete? Ask: "What perspective is missing that would change picture?" Simultaneous awareness collapses into sequential scanning (domain A, then B, then C)? Slow down — goal is hold whole field, not tour its parts. More than 7 domains active? Group related domains into clusters to reduce cognitive load while keep breadth.
Step 3: Perceive — Notice Cross-Domain Patterns
While maintain panoramic awareness, run
observe and awareness to notice patterns, tensions, resonances across all visible domains.
- Hold panoramic field open from Step 2 — do not narrow focus
- Run
to notice what actually present: what patterns repeat across domains? what tensions exist between domains? what resonances connect seemingly unrelated concerns?observe - Run
to notice what not being seen: which domains being subtly ignored? where blind spots? what assumptions operating below surface?awareness - Record cross-domain observations without interpreting yet:
- Tensions: where domains pull in opposite directions
- Resonances: where domains reinforce or echo each other
- Gaps: where no domain addresses concern that whole picture reveals
- Surprises: where domain contributes something unexpected to picture
- If
set, extend this step — cycle through observe and awareness multiple times, allow subtler patterns to surfacedepth: deep
Critical discipline: perceive across all domains together, not each domain in turn. Sequential perception loses cross-domain patterns that are entire point of synoptic cycle.
Got: Rich set of cross-domain observations — tensions, resonances, gaps, surprises. These observations span boundaries between domains rather than living within any single one. Agent noticed something that would not be visible from any single domain's perspective.
If fail: Observations all within single domains ("in domain A, I notice X")? Panoramic field collapsed. Return to Step 2 and re-open. No cross-domain patterns emerge? Problem may not require synoptic treatment — may be genuinely decomposable into independent domain problems. Perceive step produces overwhelming number of observations? Prioritize tensions (where integration happens).
Step 4: Integrate — Form Emergent Whole
Run
integrate-gestalt skill. Synthesize cross-domain observations into unified understanding.
- Map tensions identified in Step 3 — do not resolve prematurely; hold as creative constraints
- Find figure: what unified understanding emerges when all observations held together? Not compromise or average — new pattern includes but transcends individual domain perspectives
- Test whole: does integrated understanding honor each domain's core concerns? Does it resolve tensions or merely paper over them?
- Name insight in one clear statement — if cannot be stated simply, integration not yet complete
- Verify insight genuinely emergent: could have been reached by analyzing domains sequentially? If yes, synoptic cycle added no value and sequential analysis would have sufficed
Got: Single integrated understanding holds all domains together. Insight feels like discovery rather than construction — emerged from whole rather than assembled from parts. Each domain's core concerns honored. Tensions between domains resolved rather than compromised.
If fail: Integration produces "a little of each domain" rather than unified whole? Gestalt has not formed. Return to Step 3 and look for tensions being avoided — integration happens through tension, not around it. No gestalt forms after extended effort? Decompose: find 2-3 domains with strongest tensions, integrate those first, then expand.
Step 5: Express — Communicate Integrated Understanding
Run
express-insight skill. Communicate synthesis to intended audience.
- Assess audience: what domains familiar with? what framing makes integrated insight accessible?
- Choose expression form (or use one specified in inputs):
- Narrative: for audiences need to understand journey from parts to whole
- Diagram: for audiences need to see structural relationships
- Table: for audiences need to compare domain perspectives systematically
- Recommendation: for audiences need actionable decision
- Express integrated understanding with transparency: show which domains contributed, where tensions resolved, what emergent insight adds beyond any single perspective
- Invite challenge: explicit note which aspects of integration strongest and which most speculative
Got: Clear, well-formed expression of integrated understanding accessible to intended audience. Expression shows its work — audience sees how domain perspectives contributed to whole. Form matches audience's needs.
If fail: Expression feels like list of domain perspectives rather than integrated whole? Insight from Step 4 lost in translation. Return to one-statement summary from Step 4 and build expression outward from that center. Audience framing wrong? Ask: "Who needs this and what decision does it inform?"
Checks
- Step 1 (Clear) executed — prior context and domain bias explicitly released
- Step 2 (Open) produced panoramic field holding 3+ domains together
- Step 3 (Perceive) identified cross-domain patterns (not just within-domain observations)
- Step 4 (Integrate) produced single emergent insight transcends any individual domain
- Step 5 (Express) communicated insight in form appropriate to audience
- Final output could not have been produced by sequential single-domain analysis
- Each domain's core concerns honored in integrated understanding
- Tensions between domains resolved through integration, not compromise
Pitfalls
- Sequential masquerading as simultaneous: Cycling through domains one at time then stapling results together not synoptic perception. Test: did cross-domain interactions produce something new, or output just concatenation of domain analyses?
- Premature integration: Jumping to synthesis before panoramic field fully opened. Steps 2 and 3 build perceptual foundation that makes genuine integration possible — rushing them produces shallow synthesis.
- Compromise instead of emergence: Averaging domain perspectives ("50% security, 50% usability") is compromise, not integration. True integration finds frame where both concerns fully met, or honestly names irreducible trade-off.
- Overuse on single-domain problems: Not every problem needs panoramic synthesis. Problem lives cleanly in one domain? Synoptic treatment adds overhead without value. "When NOT to Use" criteria exist for reason.
- Losing insight in expression: Step 4 produces clear gestalt but Step 5 fragments back into domain-by-domain list. Keep integrated insight as center of expression; domain details are supporting evidence, not main structure.
- Domain inflation: Artificially expanding domain count to justify synoptic treatment. Three genuinely relevant domains produce better synthesis than seven domains where four are peripheral.
See Also
— Step 1 of cycle; clears context and establishes neutral starting statemeditate
— Step 2 of cycle; shifts from narrow focus to panoramic perceptionexpand-awareness
— used in Step 3; notices what present across fieldobserve
— used in Step 3; notices what not being seen, reveals blind spotsawareness
— Step 4 of cycle; forms emergent whole from cross-domain patternsintegrate-gestalt
— Step 5 of cycle; communicates integrated understandingexpress-insight