Unsure - Not Sure About This

Input: $ARGUMENTS

Core Principles

1. Uncertainty is information, not weakness. Being unsure means you’re aware of risk, complexity, or missing data. That awareness is an asset. The goal isn’t to eliminate uncertainty — it’s to make it actionable.

2. Most uncertainty is resolvable. The question is whether it’s worth resolving BEFORE acting or whether you can resolve it BY acting.

3. Confidence is not binary. You don’t need to go from unsure to certain. You need to go from unsure to “sure enough to move.”

4. The cost of waiting matters. Uncertainty sometimes justifies delay. But delay has its own cost — missed windows, accumulated anxiety, lost momentum. Weigh both sides.

Phase 1: Name the Uncertainty

[U1] WHAT_UNSURE_ABOUT: [state it precisely — not "I'm not sure" but "I'm not sure whether X because Y"]
[U2] CURRENT_LEAN: [which way are you leaning, even slightly?]
[U3] STAKES: [what happens if you're wrong?]

Phase 2: What Would Make You Sure?

[U4] CERTAINTY_SOURCE: What kind of input would resolve this?

[U5] IDENTIFIED_SOURCE: [information | validation | experience | time | gut]

Phase 3: Decision Tree

Can you get that certainty quickly (< 1 day)?
├── YES → Go get it. Then decide.
│   [U6] ACTION: [specific step to get the information/validation/etc.]
│   → Return here after.
│
└── NO → Is the cost of being wrong recoverable?
    ├── YES (recoverable) → Proceed with a checkpoint.
    │   [U7] PROCEED_ACTION: [what to do now]
    │   [U8] CHECKPOINT: [when/how to check if this was right]
    │   [U9] REVERSAL_COST: [what it takes to undo if wrong]
    │   "Act, check, adjust. Don't wait for certainty you can't get cheaply."
    │
    └── NO (not easily recoverable) → Invest in certainty.
        [U10] INVESTMENT: [what it takes to become more sure]
        [U11] TIMELINE: [how long this investment takes]
        [U12] MINIMUM_CONFIDENCE: [what level of certainty justifies acting]
        "This is worth slowing down for. The cost of being wrong exceeds the cost of waiting."

Phase 4: Gut Check Override

Before following the tree, check:

[U13] GUT_SAYS: [what does your instinct say, separate from analysis?]
[U14] GUT_CONFLICT: [does your gut conflict with the decision tree result?]

If gut conflicts with the tree:

• Gut says GO but tree says WAIT → Check if you’re avoiding the discomfort of uncertainty rather than responding to actual risk
• Gut says WAIT but tree says GO → Check if there’s information your gut is processing that your analysis missed. Name it if you can.

Phase 5: Output

NOT SURE ABOUT THIS
===================

UNCERTAINTY: [precise statement of what's unsure]
LEANING: [current lean]
STAKES: [what's at risk]

WHAT WOULD HELP: [certainty source]
CAN GET IT QUICKLY: [yes/no]

RECOMMENDATION:
  [One of three paths:]
  a) GET THE INFO: [specific action] — then decide
  b) PROCEED WITH CHECKPOINT: [action] — check at [checkpoint]
  c) INVEST IN CERTAINTY: [what to do] — timeline [X]

GUT CHECK: [aligned / conflicting — with note if conflicting]

READY FOR:
- /dcp [decision] — if this is really a decision between options
- /aex [assumption] — if the uncertainty is about an assumption you're making
- /ht [hypothesis] — if you want to test your lean before committing

Failure Modes

Depth Scaling

Default: 2x. These are floors.

Pre-Completion Checklist

• Uncertainty named precisely (not vague)
• Current lean identified (even if slight)
• Stakes assessed honestly
• Certainty source identified
• Decision tree followed to a recommendation
• Gut check performed and noted
• Recommendation is specific and actionable

Integration

• Use from: “I’m not sure”, “I think so but…”, “maybe I should”, mild hesitation
• Routes to: /dcp (decision process), /aex (assumption examination), /ht (hypothesis testing)
• Differs from /idk: idk has no direction; unsure has a direction but lacks confidence
• Differs from /cnfsd: cnfsd doesn’t understand something; unsure understands but doesn’t trust
• Differs from /dcp: dcp compares defined options; unsure may not have clear options yet