Assume Critical

Input: $ARGUMENTS

Core Move

Take something and assume it’s critical. Not just important — essential. Without it, everything fails. Then trace what that means and whether the claim holds.

Useful for testing priorities and distinguishing “nice to have” from “must have.”

Procedure

Step 1: Identify the Thing

What are we assuming is critical?

Step 2: Force the Assumption

“[X] is absolutely critical. Without it, the entire effort fails.”

Step 3: Trace Implications

If it’s truly critical:

1. What fails without it? — Specifically, what breaks? Trace the failure cascade.
2. What must we do to protect it? — If critical, what resources, backup plans, or safeguards are needed?
3. What’s the cost of protection? — Treating something as critical is expensive. What’s the cost?
4. What gets deprioritized? — If this is critical, what’s NOT critical? What drops?
5. Is it fragile? — Critical AND fragile = urgent problem. Critical AND robust = less urgent.
6. Can it be made non-critical? — Can we redesign so this isn’t a single point of failure?

Step 4: Test the Assumption

• What’s the actual evidence that this is critical?
• Has anything succeeded WITHOUT this element?
• Is it critical for ALL outcomes, or just the current plan?
• Could we run a small experiment without it to test?

Step 5: Synthesize

THING: [X]
ASSUMING CRITICAL:
  Without it: [failure cascade]
  Protection cost: [resources needed]
  Deprioritizes: [what drops in importance]
  Fragility: [fragile/robust]
CRITICALITY CONFIDENCE: [high/medium/low]
IF NOT CRITICAL: [what changes about strategy]

When to Use

• Prioritizing limited resources
• Testing whether a “requirement” is actually required
• Designing for resilience (find single points of failure)

Integration

• Pair with /airr for the opposite stance
• Use in sequence on multiple elements to build a priority map
• Follow with /cmp to compare criticality across elements