Unknown: Surface Blind Spots with Known/Unknown Quadrants
Surface hidden assumptions and blind spots in any strategy, plan, or decision using the Known/Unknown quadrant framework and hypothesis-driven questioning.
When to Use
Strategy or planning documents that need scrutiny
Decisions with unclear direction or hidden assumptions
Any situation where "what we don't know" matters more than "what we do know"
For specific requirement clarification (feature requests, bug reports), use the
vague
skill. For content-vs-form reframing (optimizing within a form vs inventing a new form), use the
metamedium
skill.
Core Principle: Hypothesis-as-Options
ALWAYS use the AskUserQuestion tool
for every question in R1/R2/R3 — never ask questions in plain text. The structured format enforces hypothesis-as-options and limits choice fatigue.
Present hypotheses as options instead of open questions. The hypotheses ARE the analysis — by designing good options, 80% of the analytical work is done before the user even answers. The user's job is to confirm, correct, or surprise.
BAD: "Why can't you do video content?" ← open question, high load
GOOD: "Time / Skill gap / No guests / High bar" ← pick one or more
Each option IS a testable hypothesis about the user's situation
Use multiSelect: true to catch compound causes
"Other" is always available for out-of-frame answers
3-Round Depth Pattern
Round
Purpose
Questions
Key trait
R1
Validate draft quadrant
3-4
Broad, covers all quadrants
R2
Drill into weak spots
2-3
Targeted, follows R1 answers
R3
Nail execution details
2-3
Specific, optional
Critical
Generate Round N questions from Round N-1 answers. Never use pre-prepared questions across rounds. Cap total at 7-10 questions.
Protocol
Phase 1: Intake
File provided
Read and extract goals, components, implicit assumptions, missing elements.
Topic keyword only
Start directly with R1 questions to establish scope. The draft in Phase 3 will be rougher but R1 corrects it.
Phase 2: Context
Gather related context to find Unknown Knowns — assets the user may not realize they have:
Glob
for related files: CLAUDE.md, README, decision records, past analyses in the project
Read
project context: recent goals, team structure, active initiatives
Identify
underutilized assets: existing tools/skills not in use, past projects with reusable patterns, team expertise not leveraged
Items discovered here become UK candidates and options in R1 questions.
Phase 3: Draft + R1 Questions
Generate an initial 4-quadrant classification.
The draft is intentionally rough
— R1 exists to correct it, not confirm it. Err on the side of classifying uncertain items as KU rather than KK.
Design R1 questions to test quadrant boundaries.
Batch all R1 questions into a single AskUserQuestion call
(max 4 questions):
Target
Pattern
Example
KK
"Is this really certain?"
"Primary revenue source?" (options)
KU
"Where's the weakest link?"
"Which flywheel connection is weakest?"
UK
"What exists but isn't used?"
Based on context findings
UU
"What's the biggest fear?"
Risk scenarios as options
Phase 4: Deepen + R2 Questions
Analyze R1 answers. Find the most uncertain area and drill in.
R2 triggers
compound answers (messy area), unexpected answers (draft wrong), "Other" selected (outside frame).
For detailed R2 question types, see
references/question-design.md
.
Phase 5: Execute + R3 Questions (Optional)
After priorities are set, nail down execution details for top items. Skip if R2 already provides enough detail.
Phase 6: Playbook Output
Generate a structured 4-quadrant playbook file. For the complete output template, see
references/playbook-template.md
.
Output structure:
Adjust based on context — e.g., a startup exploring product-market fit may allocate 40% KU and 30% KK.
Anti-Patterns
Open questions ("What would you like to do?") — use hypothesis options
5+ options per question — causes choice fatigue
Ignoring R1 answers when designing R2 — performative questioning
Equal depth on all quadrants — wastes time, loses focus
No "stop doing" section — adding without subtracting
Example
Input
Growth strategy document
R1
Revenue source? → Workshops. Weakest link? → Biz→Knowledge. Blocker? → Skill gap + high bar (multiSelect). Biggest fear? → Execution scattered.
R2
(driven by "execution scattered"): What to drop? → Product dev. Why no knowledge→content? → No process + no time + hard to abstract. Role clarity? → Unclear.
R3
Video format? → Screen recording. Retro blocker? → Don't know what to capture. What content resonated? → Raw discoveries.
Key discovery
Abstraction isn't needed — raw insights work better. Collapsed triple bottleneck into 15-minute pipeline.
Rules
Hypotheses, not questions
Every option is a testable hypothesis
Answers drive depth
R2 from R1, R3 from R2
7-10 questions max
Beyond this is fatigue
Stop > Start
Always include "what to stop doing"
Promote or kill
Every KU gets a promotion condition and a kill condition
Raw > Perfect
Encourage minimum viable experiments, not perfect plans
Draft is disposable
The initial quadrant is meant to be corrected
Additional Resources
Reference Files
references/question-design.md
— Detailed question types for each round, trigger conditions, and AskUserQuestion formatting guide
references/playbook-template.md
— Complete output template with section-by-section guide