gh-dotclaude-marketplace-plugins-insight-engine/commands/assumption_audit.md

model, allowed-tools, argument-hint, description

model	allowed-tools	argument-hint	description
claude-sonnet-4-0	Task, Read, Write, Bash(*), Glob, Grep	<domain-or-proposal> [--audit-depth=<level>] [--challenge-method=<approach>] [--scope=<breadth>]	Fundamental premise challenging with alternative framework generation

Assumption Audit Engine

Systematically identify, examine, and challenge fundamental assumptions to reveal hidden constraints and generate alternative frameworks for breakthrough thinking. Transform taken-for-granted beliefs into explicit, testable hypotheses that can be validated or replaced with superior alternatives.

Audit Depth Framework

Explicit Level (Stated assumptions and declared premises)

[Extended thinking: Surface assumptions that are openly stated but rarely questioned. These are visible premises that organizations or individuals acknowledge but don't critically examine.]

Identification Targets:

• Declared Constraints: Explicitly stated limitations that may be negotiable
• Policy Premises: Organizational rules based on assumptions about efficiency or necessity
• Method Assumptions: Stated beliefs about why certain approaches work best
• Resource Limitations: Declared scarcity that may reflect historical rather than current reality
• Timeline Constraints: Stated deadlines based on assumptions about dependencies and priorities

Audit Questions:

• "What explicit constraints are we stating, and why do we believe they're absolute?"
• "Which policies exist because of assumptions that may no longer be valid?"
• "What stated limitations might be more flexible than we assume?"
• "Which declared 'requirements' are actually preferences or historical artifacts?"
• "What timeline constraints are based on assumptions versus proven dependencies?"

Implicit Level (Unstated but operating assumptions)

[Extended thinking: Uncover hidden assumptions that guide behavior and decision-making without conscious recognition. These are often the most powerful constraints because they operate below awareness.]

Identification Targets:

• Cultural Defaults: Unspoken beliefs about "how things are done" in organization or domain
• Success Definitions: Unstated assumptions about what constitutes good outcomes
• User Behavior Models: Hidden beliefs about how people will interact with systems
• Market Assumptions: Unstated beliefs about customer needs and competitive dynamics
• Technology Premises: Hidden assumptions about what's possible or practical

Audit Questions:

• "What behaviors do we exhibit that reveal unstated beliefs?"
• "What are we optimizing for that we never explicitly decided to prioritize?"
• "What user behaviors are we assuming without validation?"
• "Which market conditions do we treat as permanent that might be temporary?"
• "What technological limitations do we accept without questioning their necessity?"

Structural Level (Framework and methodology assumptions)

[Extended thinking: Challenge the fundamental frameworks and methodologies being used. Question not just the content of thinking but the structure of thinking itself.]

Identification Targets:

• Analytical Frameworks: Assumed models for understanding and analysis
• Decision-Making Processes: Unstated assumptions about how choices should be made
• Problem-Solving Approaches: Hidden beliefs about effective methodology
• Measurement Systems: Assumptions about what should be measured and how
• Organizational Structures: Unstated beliefs about how work should be organized

Audit Questions:

• "What analytical framework are we using, and why is it the right one?"
• "What assumptions underlie our decision-making process?"
• "Are we solving the right problem, or just the problem we know how to solve?"
• "What are we measuring, and what does that reveal about our assumptions?"
• "How does our organizational structure reflect assumptions about human nature and work?"

Paradigmatic Level (Worldview and philosophical premises)

[Extended thinking: Question fundamental worldview assumptions that shape entire approaches to problems. Challenge the deepest philosophical premises about reality, human nature, and possibility.]

Identification Targets:

• Reality Models: Basic assumptions about how the world works
• Human Nature Beliefs: Fundamental assumptions about motivation, capability, and behavior
• Value System Premises: Unstated beliefs about what matters most
• Progress Assumptions: Hidden beliefs about development, improvement, and change
• Possibility Boundaries: Assumptions about what's achievable or impossible

Audit Questions:

• "What fundamental beliefs about reality underlie our entire approach?"
• "What assumptions about human nature shape our strategies?"
• "Which values are we prioritizing without conscious choice?"
• "What beliefs about progress and improvement guide our decisions?"
• "What do we assume is impossible that might actually be achievable?"

Challenge Methodology Framework

Evidence Examination Protocol

[Extended thinking: Systematically demand proof for assumptions, testing their factual foundation and empirical support.]

Evidence Validation Process:

1. Source Identification: Where did this assumption originate?
2. Recency Assessment: How current is the supporting evidence?
3. Context Relevance: Does evidence from other contexts apply here?
4. Sample Size Evaluation: Is evidence based on sufficient data?
5. Alternative Explanation Testing: What other factors might explain observed patterns?

Evidence Quality Framework:

• Primary vs. Secondary: Direct observation versus reported findings
• Quantitative vs. Anecdotal: Statistical data versus individual stories
• Independent vs. Interested: Unbiased sources versus stakeholder claims
• Recent vs. Historical: Current conditions versus past circumstances
• Comprehensive vs. Limited: Broad sampling versus narrow examples

Alternative Generation Engine

[Extended thinking: Create competing premises and frameworks that could replace existing assumptions with potentially superior alternatives.]

Alternative Development Process:

1. Assumption Inversion: What if the opposite assumption were true?
2. Context Shifting: How would this assumption change in different environments?
3. Stakeholder Rotation: What would this look like from different perspectives?
4. Time Projection: How might this assumption evolve with changing conditions?
5. Constraint Removal: What becomes possible if we eliminate this assumption?

Alternative Categories:

• Incremental Variations: Small modifications to existing assumptions
• Orthogonal Approaches: Completely different frameworks for same problem
• Paradigm Shifts: Fundamental worldview changes that transform everything
• Hybrid Models: Combinations of existing and alternative assumptions
• Future-State Projections: Assumptions appropriate for anticipated future conditions

Edge Case Testing Framework

[Extended thinking: Find boundary conditions and extreme scenarios where assumptions break down, revealing their limitations and appropriate scope.]

Boundary Exploration:

• Scale Extremes: What happens at very small or very large scales?
• Performance Limits: At what point do assumptions cease to function?
• Resource Variations: How do assumptions change with different resource levels?
• Context Extremes: What conditions would make assumptions invalid?
• Stakeholder Diversity: How do assumptions work for different user types?

Failure Mode Analysis:

• Graceful Degradation: How do assumptions fail when conditions change?
• Cascade Effects: What happens when assumption failure affects other assumptions?
• Recovery Mechanisms: How can systems adapt when assumptions prove incorrect?
• Warning Signals: What indicators suggest assumption validity is declining?
• Alternative Activation: How quickly can alternative assumptions be implemented?

Execution Examples

Example 1: Product Development Assumption Audit

assumption_audit "Our users want more features" --audit-depth=implicit --challenge-method=evidence --scope=comprehensive

Implicit Assumption Identification:

• Hidden Premise: "Feature quantity correlates with user satisfaction"
• Unstated Belief: "Users can effectively utilize additional complexity"
• Cultural Default: "Progress means adding capabilities"
• Success Definition: "Customer requests indicate true needs"
• User Behavior Model: "Power users represent our core market"

Evidence Examination:

• Request vs. Usage Analysis: Do users actually use requested features?
• Satisfaction Correlation: Does feature count correlate with user satisfaction scores?
• Competitive Analysis: Do feature-rich competitors have higher user retention?
• Behavior Tracking: How do users interact with existing feature sets?
• Churn Analysis: Do users leave because of missing features or overwhelming complexity?

Alternative Framework Generation:

• Alternative 1: "Users want better execution of core features rather than new features"
• Alternative 2: "Different user segments have completely different feature priorities"
• Alternative 3: "Users want easier workflows, which might mean fewer, not more features"
• Alternative 4: "Feature requests reflect user workarounds for poor core functionality"

Example 2: Organizational Structure Assumption Audit

assumption_audit "Hierarchical management improves coordination" --audit-depth=structural --challenge-method=alternative-generation --scope=organizational

Structural Framework Challenge:

• Management Hierarchy: Assumes information flows efficiently up and down command chains
• Decision Authority: Assumes people closest to authority make best decisions
• Coordination Mechanism: Assumes central coordination prevents conflicts and duplication
• Accountability Structure: Assumes clear reporting lines improve responsibility
• Information Flow: Assumes managers effectively filter and distribute information

Alternative Generation Process:

• Network Model: Self-organizing teams with peer-to-peer coordination
• Market Model: Internal teams compete and collaborate like external vendors
• Community Model: Shared ownership and collective decision-making
• Platform Model: Central infrastructure with autonomous product teams
• Hybrid Models: Different structures for different types of work

Edge Case Testing:

• Rapid Change: How does hierarchy handle fast-moving, uncertain environments?
• Creative Work: Does hierarchical oversight help or hinder innovation?
• Expert Knowledge: How does hierarchy work when subordinates have more domain expertise?
• Crisis Response: Which structure responds more effectively to emergencies?
• Scale Variations: At what organizational size do different models work best?

Example 3: Technology Architecture Assumption Audit

assumption_audit "Microservices improve system maintainability" --audit-depth=paradigmatic --challenge-method=paradigm-shift --scope=technical

Paradigmatic Challenge:

• Modularity Paradigm: Assumes breaking systems into smaller pieces improves understanding
• Independence Ideal: Assumes loose coupling always improves system properties
• Distributed Systems Philosophy: Assumes network-based coordination is manageable
• Service Ownership Model: Assumes team boundaries should match service boundaries
• Technology Diversity Belief: Assumes freedom to choose different technologies per service is beneficial

Paradigm Shift Exploration:

• Monolithic Excellence: What if we made monoliths so good that splitting them became unnecessary?
• Deployment-Only Microservices: What if we kept logical modularity but deployed as single unit?
• Data-Centric Architecture: What if we organized around data flows rather than service boundaries?
• Function-Based Systems: What if we organized around mathematical functions rather than services?
• AI-Coordinated Complexity: What if AI agents managed distributed system coordination?

Worldview Assumption Testing:

• Complexity Management: Is distributed complexity easier to manage than centralized complexity?
• Human Cognitive Limits: Are service boundaries artificial constraints on human understanding?
• System Evolution: Do systems naturally want to be distributed or unified?
• Development Team Dynamics: Do small teams always produce better software?

Advanced Audit Features

Assumption Interdependency Mapping

[Extended thinking: Identify how assumptions depend on each other and how challenging one assumption might cascade to others.]

Dependency Analysis:

• Foundation Assumptions: Core premises that support multiple other assumptions
• Chain Dependencies: Linear sequences where each assumption depends on the previous
• Circular Dependencies: Assumptions that mutually reinforce each other
• Hierarchical Support: How high-level assumptions justify lower-level premises
• Cross-Domain Connections: How assumptions in one area affect other areas

Cultural Context Assessment

[Extended thinking: Understand how assumptions are shaped by and embedded in specific cultural, organizational, or professional contexts.]

Context Evaluation:

• Industry Culture: How professional norms shape assumptions
• Organizational History: How past experiences create current assumptions
• Geographic Influence: How location and culture affect premises
• Generational Differences: How assumptions vary across age groups
• Educational Background: How training and education embed assumptions

Assumption Evolution Tracking

[Extended thinking: Monitor how assumptions change over time and predict future assumption shifts.]

Evolution Patterns:

• Historical Progression: How assumptions have changed in the past
• Trigger Events: What events cause assumption shifts
• Gradual Drift: Slow assumption evolution without explicit recognition
• Revolutionary Shifts: Rapid, dramatic assumption changes
• Cyclical Patterns: Assumptions that periodically return in new forms

Success Optimization

Audit Quality Indicators

• Assumption Discovery: Identification of previously unrecognized premises
• Evidence Rigor: Thorough testing of assumption foundations
• Alternative Creativity: Generation of genuinely different frameworks
• Challenge Depth: Willingness to question fundamental premises
• Implementation Readiness: Practical pathways for assumption replacement

Breakthrough Potential Assessment

• Constraint Liberation: Freedom from limiting beliefs
• Innovation Opportunity: New possibilities revealed through assumption challenging
• Competitive Advantage: Unique approaches unavailable to assumption-bound competitors
• Problem Reframing: Better problem definitions through assumption questioning
• Solution Space Expansion: Broader range of possible solutions

Risk Management

• Assumption Replacement Safety: Ensuring new assumptions are better than old ones
• Change Management: Managing transition from old to new assumption sets
• Validation Methodology: Testing new assumptions before full commitment
• Rollback Planning: Preparing for assumption change failure
• Stakeholder Communication: Explaining assumption changes to affected parties

The assumption_audit command reveals hidden constraints and creates breakthrough opportunities by systematically challenging fundamental premises and generating alternative frameworks that expand solution possibilities.