Meta-Reasoning Core
Input: $ARGUMENTS
The Three Questions
All metacognition reduces to three questions. Ask them in order. Loop when stuck.
1. What am I actually trying to achieve?
Trace backward from the immediate request to the foundational goal.
- What was asked? (surface)
- What does that serve? (one level up)
- What does THAT serve? (keep going until you hit something fundamental)
- Is the surface request the best way to serve the foundational goal?
Common failure: Executing the request without checking if it serves the real goal. Someone asks “help me write a resignation letter” — but the goal might be “improve my work situation,” which has other solutions.
Output: A clear statement of the foundational goal, and whether the current request is the best path to it.
2. Is this the best method?
Before executing any approach, check:
- What other methods could achieve this goal?
- What would an expert in a different field suggest?
- Am I using this method because it’s best, or because it’s familiar?
- What’s the strongest argument AGAINST this approach?
Common failure: Accepting the first method that seems workable without generating alternatives. Method lock-in.
Output: Either confidence that this is the right method (with reasoning), or a better alternative.
3. Am I making progress?
During execution, check:
- Is the output getting closer to the goal?
- Am I learning anything surprising? (If no surprises, I might be confirming instead of exploring)
- Am I going through motions or generating insight? (Enumeration vs derivation)
- Should I continue, adjust, or stop?
Common failure: Continuing because the procedure says to, not because progress is happening. Sunk cost.
Output: A decision — continue (making progress), adjust (on track but method needs tweaking), pivot (wrong track), or stop (goal achieved or unachievable).
When to Ask Each Question
| Moment | Question | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Starting a new task | Q1: What am I achieving? | Don’t execute before understanding |
| Choosing an approach | Q2: Is this the best method? | Don’t commit without alternatives |
| Mid-execution, any doubt | Q3: Am I making progress? | Don’t continue on faith |
| Getting a surprising result | Q1: Does this change the goal? | Surprises can redefine the problem |
| Feeling stuck | Q2: Is there a better method? | Stuckness usually means wrong method |
| Feeling productive but uncertain | Q3: Is this real progress or busywork? | Activity ≠ progress |
Integration with Other Skills
Meta-reasoning is not a skill you “run” — it’s a lens you apply while running other skills.
- During
/araw: Q3 — “Am I exploring or enumerating?” - During
/uaua: Q1 — “Is this the right question to universalize?” - During
/gen: Q2 — “Is generation the right step, or do I need to understand first?” - During
/cri: Q3 — “Is this critique actionable or just commentary?”
Failure Indicators
You’ve failed at metacognition if:
- Jumped to execution without asking Q1
- Accepted the first method without asking Q2
- Continued past the point of usefulness without asking Q3
- Produced output that’s formally correct but doesn’t serve the goal
- Never encountered a surprise (suggests confirmation bias)