ThinkDeep: Extended Reasoning Analysis

Step 1: Parse Request Parameters

Analyze the thinkdeep request: $ARGUMENTS

Parameter Extraction:

• Main prompt: [extract core thinking request]
• Focus areas: [extract “architecture, performance, security” etc]
• File references: [extract “reference to file.py” patterns]
• Problem context: [extract additional context provided]

Parsed Configuration:

• Prompt: [core request]
• Focus areas: [identified areas]
• File references: [any files mentioned]
• Problem context: [additional context]

Step 2: Deep Sequential Analysis

Use sequential thinking (mcp__sequential-thinking__sequentialthinking) for extended reasoning:

Thought 1: Context Understanding

Analyze the current session context to understand:

• What has been discussed so far
• Previous decisions and analyses made
• User’s specific constraints and goals
• Existing solutions or approaches tried

Thought 2: Problem Decomposition

Break down the core issue into:

• Primary problem statement
• Key sub-problems or components
• Underlying assumptions and constraints
• Success criteria and desired outcomes

Thought 3: Assumption Challenge

Question the underlying assumptions:

• What assumptions are we making?
• Are these assumptions valid in this context?
• What if the opposite were true?
• Alternative perspectives to consider

Thought 4: Alternative Approaches Exploration

Explore different solution paths:

• Conventional approaches and their pros/cons
• Unconventional or innovative solutions
• Trade-offs between different options
• Hybrid or combined approaches

Thought 5: Context Integration

Incorporate relevant context:

• File references and code patterns
• Previous session insights
• User’s specific technical stack
• Business or project constraints

Thought 6: Edge Case Analysis

Identify potential issues:

• What could go wrong with each approach?
• Edge cases and failure modes
• Scalability and performance concerns
• Security and maintenance implications

Thought 7: Risk Assessment

Evaluate risks for each option:

• Implementation complexity
• Technical debt potential
• Team skill requirements
• Timeline and resource impacts

Thought 8: Solution Synthesis

Combine insights into recommendations:

• Primary recommended approach
• Backup or alternative options
• Implementation considerations
• Next steps and validation points

Continue sequential thinking until satisfaction, using:

• isRevision: true to refine previous thoughts
• branchFromThought to explore alternative reasoning paths
• needsMoreThoughts: true to extend analysis if needed

Step 3: Critical Evaluation & Synthesis

Self-Critique Questions:

• Does the analysis address the user’s specific context?
• Are the recommendations practical and implementable?
• Have we considered the most important constraints?
• Are there any blind spots or missing perspectives?

Contextual Validation:

• Fit with user’s technical stack and preferences
• Alignment with previous decisions in session
• Practicality given team skills and resources
• Integration with existing systems or patterns

Final Synthesis:

• Primary Recommendation: [best approach with rationale]
• Alternative Options: [backup plans with trade-offs]
• Implementation Guidance: [key considerations and next steps]
• Risk Mitigation: [how to address identified concerns]

Usage Examples

Basic deep analysis:

/atelier-thinkdeep "Analyze my authentication architecture"

With file references:

/atelier-thinkdeep "Evaluate my database schema with reference to models/user.py"

With focus areas:

/atelier-thinkdeep "Assess my microservices design focusing on performance and security"

Complex architectural decisions:

/atelier-thinkdeep "Should I use GraphQL or REST for my API considering team skills and scalability needs"

When to Use ThinkDeep

• Architecture decisions: When choosing between major design approaches
• Complex problem solving: Multi-faceted issues requiring deep analysis
• Assumption validation: Challenging conventional wisdom or previous decisions
• Alternative exploration: When stuck and need fresh perspectives
• Risk assessment: Before major implementation decisions

ThinkDeep vs Challenge

Use /atelier-thinkdeep: Deep exploration, comprehensive analysis, alternative discovery, complex decisions Use /atelier-challenge: Question assumptions, test validity, assess risks, prevent automatic agreement

Key distinction: ThinkDeep = deep exploration, Challenge = critical evaluation

Expected Outcomes

After using this command:

• Comprehensive understanding of the problem space
• Multiple approaches evaluated with trade-offs
• Clear recommendation with solid reasoning
• Risk assessment and mitigation strategies
• Actionable next steps for implementation