six-thinking-hats

Setup

If ~/six-thinking-hats/ doesn't exist, or memory shows setup incomplete, read setup.md first.

When to Use

User needs to analyze a decision, problem, or idea thoroughly. Agent applies De Bono's Six Thinking Hats method to explore all angles systematically.

Architecture

Memory lives in ~/six-thinking-hats/. See memory-template.md for structure.

~/six-thinking-hats/
├── memory.md       # Preferences + past analyses
└── archive/        # Completed analyses

Quick Reference

Topic	File
Setup process	`setup.md`
Memory template	`memory-template.md`
Hat details	`hats.md`

The Six Hats

Hat	Focus	Key Question
White	Facts, data	What do we know? What data is missing?
Red	Emotions, intuition	How do I feel about this? Gut reaction?
Black	Risks, problems	What could go wrong? Why might this fail?
Yellow	Benefits, value	What are the advantages? Best case?
Green	Creativity, alternatives	What else is possible? New ideas?
Blue	Process, control	What's the next step? Summary?

Core Rules

1. One Hat at a Time

Wear only ONE hat at each moment
Complete that perspective before switching
Announce hat changes explicitly

2. Sequence Matters

Standard sequence for decisions: 1. Blue — Define the problem 2. White — Gather facts 3. Green — Generate options 4. Yellow — Evaluate benefits (per option) 5. Black — Evaluate risks (per option) 6. Red — Gut check 7. Blue — Conclude and decide

3. Keep It Parallel

Everyone thinks in the same direction
No arguing or defending
Each hat gets its full moment

4. Red Hat Is Brief

Emotions only, no justification
30 seconds max
"I feel excited" not "I feel excited because..."

5. Black Hat Is Not Negative

Critical thinking, not negativity
Identifies risks to ADDRESS, not to reject
Paired with Yellow for balance

6. Green Hat Forces Output

Generate at least 3 alternatives
No judgment during Green
Quantity over quality first

7. Blue Hat Owns the Process

Opens and closes the session
Summarizes each hat's findings
Makes the meta-decisions

Output Format

When analyzing a decision, structure output as:

## Analysis: [Topic]

### Blue Hat: Framing
[Problem statement, scope, goal]

### White Hat: Facts
[Known data, missing information, sources]

### Green Hat: Options
1. [Option A]
2. [Option B]
3. [Option C]

### Yellow Hat: Benefits
| Option | Benefits |
|--------|----------|
| A | [benefits] |
| B | [benefits] |
| C | [benefits] |

### Black Hat: Risks
| Option | Risks |
|--------|-------|
| A | [risks] |
| B | [risks] |
| C | [risks] |

### Red Hat: Gut Check
[Brief emotional response to each option]

### Blue Hat: Conclusion
[Summary, recommendation, next steps]

Common Traps

Mixing hats → analysis becomes confused, key perspectives missed
Skipping Red → ignoring intuition that might catch what logic misses
Black without Yellow → decisions feel negative, good options get rejected
Green without constraints → impractical ideas waste time
No Blue at end → analysis without actionable conclusion

Install with clawhub install <slug> if user confirms: - decide — decision frameworks - brainstorm — creative idea generation - first-principles-thinking — foundational analysis

Feedback

If useful: clawhub star six-thinking-hats
Stay updated: clawhub sync