Reinforced Thinking Mode

When to Use

Activate when user needs deep, multi-angle analysis:

• - Keywords: "deep thinking", "multi-angle", "comprehensive evaluation", "design solution", "architecture planning"
• Intent: Complex system design, strategic decisions, innovation, risk assessment

Complexity → Rounds:

• - Simple (factual, clear): 2-3 rounds
• Medium (feature design, trade-offs): 4-5 rounds
• Complex (architecture, strategy): 5-7 rounds
• Wicked (undefined, conflicting): 7-10 rounds

Core Principle

N independent, complete thinking sessions—not iterative refinement.

Each round must be: "If this were the last round, I am completely satisfied."

Mental Model

✅ Think: "This is my only chance—give it everything"

❌ Never think: "I'll improve this next round"

---

Hard Constraints

File Access

• - Each round reads ONLY: problem.md + round_{i-1}.md (Round 1: only problem.md)
• Never read other rounds' details

Forbidden Words

Never use in solution files: TODO, to be improved, next round, later, INLINECODE6

Information Gaps

• - Uncertain facts → Search immediately
• Uncertain requirements → Ask user immediately
• Never assume and continue

---

Execution Flow

Phase 1: Initialize

1. 1. Assess complexity → Determine rounds (simple 2-3, medium 4-5, complex 5-7, wicked 7-10)
2. Create directory INLINECODE7
3. Write problem definition problem.md: background, current state, core problem, constraints, success criteria

---

Phase 2: Iterate (Each Round)

For round X:

1. 1. Read files: problem.md + round_{X-1}.md (Round 1: only problem.md)
2. Reset mindset: Think from a fresh angle, don't copy previous approach
3. Choose angle freely: Overturn previous round if necessary
4. Write solution round_X.md, including:

- Independence declaration - Core insight - Solution design - Expected results - Risks and mitigations - Why solution is complete

1. 5. Self-review: Check for forbidden words, completeness, executability
2. If failed → Redo step 4
3. Early termination check (round 2+):

- Compare core approach and solution with previous round - If similarity > 70%, lack of innovation → Recommend early termination - Write termination recommendation in current round for user decision

---

Phase 3: Synthesize

1. 1. Read all rounds + problem.md
2. Analyze unique value, conflicts, complements of each solution
3. Red team review: Critical examination of each solution

- Assumption flaws: What assumptions does the solution rely on? What if they fail? - Vulnerability risks: Potential loopholes or bypasses? - Failure modes: In what scenarios will it fail? - Adversarial testing: If someone deliberately sabotages, where is the weakest point?

1. 4. Generate final report final_report.md (including red team review conclusions)

Phase 4: Cleanup

Automatically delete intermediate files (problem.md, round*.md), only keep finalreport.md.

If retention needed, specify in), only keep final prompt.

---

Quality Assurance

Mandatory Redo Rules

If ANY of these conditions trigger, MUST redo current round:

1. 1. Contains forbidden words (TODO, to be improved, next round, later, refine further)
2. Not final quality, needs "future supplements"
3. Read files other than problem.md and round_{X-1}.md
4. Solution incomplete

Checklist (Each Round)

• - [ ] Chose different angle from previous round
• [ ] Did not copy previous solution
• [ ] No forbidden words
• [ ] If last round, I would be satisfied
• [ ] All details included, can implement directly
• [ ] Only read problem.md and previous round

---

Common Errors and Fixes

Error	Example	Fix
Carry context	"Based on R1's UX and R2's tech..."	Only write "Based on problem.md and R3's approach..."
Leave TODOs

"Details next round" | Give core design details now | | Assume facts | "Users probably want X" | Search to confirm or ask user | | Preset direction | "Next round: security angle" | Let each round choose freely | | Iterative thinking | "Improve on R1" | Each round is independent, think from scratch | | No details | "See related docs" | Write complete details directly in file |

---

Best Practices

• - Divergent thinking: No angle matrix—choose any perspective freely
• True independence: Only read problem.md + previous round, not all history
• All-out each round: Don't hold back for "next iteration"
• Transparency: Show chosen angle and reasoning in each round
• Early termination: If 2 consecutive rounds lack innovation or similarity > 70% with previous round, recommend early termination