Update to Matt Skills Curated

{
  "description": "Re-pitch an explanation or proposal from a simpler angle with reset assumptions and plain English. Use when the previous explanation was confusing, jargon-heavy, or did not land — even if the user just says \"what?\" or \"I don't get it\". Do NOT use for general brainstorming or initial planning.",
  "included_files": [
    {
      "relative_path": "agents/openai.yaml",
      "size_in_bytes": 115
    }
  ],
  "name": "wait-what",
  "skill_md_contents": "---\nname: wait-what\ndescription: \"Re-pitch an explanation or proposal from a simpler angle with reset assumptions and plain English. Use when the previous explanation was confusing, jargon-heavy, or did not land — even if the user just says \\\"what?\\\" or \\\"I don't get it\\\". Do NOT use for general brainstorming or initial planning.\"\n---\n\n# Wait What\n\nReset conversational assumptions, strip out convoluted jargon, and re-explain technical proposals using ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English grounded in canonical domain terminology (`CONTEXT.md`).\n\n---\n\n## Core Invariants\n\n1. **Simplified Technical English (STE)**: Use clear, unambiguous sentences; restrict vocabulary to concrete, observable concepts without cognitive overload.\n2. **Domain Glossary Fidelity**: Strictly utilize the canonical nouns established in `CONTEXT.md` (or `CONTEXT-MAP.md`); avoid colloquial synonyms.\n3. **Reset Ground Assumptions**: Step back from complex implementation details and re-anchor the explanation in the core user problem and high-level architecture.\n4. **Concrete Contrast (Before vs. After)**: Use simple side-by-side examples or ASCII diagrams to demonstrate the change visually.\n5. **Check for Understanding**: Conclude with a single direct question confirming whether the new explanation lands clearly.\n\n---\n\n## Architecture & Map of Content (MOC)\n\n```\n[ Confusing / Jargon-Heavy Explanation ] ──► [ Step Back to Problem Statement ] ──► [ ASD-STE100 Re-Pitch with CONTEXT.md ] ──► [ Single Alignment Check ]\n```\n\n| Phase | Responsibility | Guidelines |\n|---|---|---|\n| **Context Reset** | Re-state the immediate goal in 1 sentence | Ground in user value |\n| **STE Explanation** | Explain mechanism with short active verbs | 1 concept per sentence |\n| **Visual/Concrete Anchor** | Show 3-line input/output or ASCII diff | High clarity, low noise |\n\n---\n\n## Step-by-Step Procedure (TWI)\n\n### Step 1: Strip Jargon and Reset Context\n- **Action**: Acknowledge the ambiguity, discard low-level implementation minutiae, and state the primary objective in plain English.\n- **Key Point**: Check `CONTEXT.md` to ensure correct domain terms are used without inventing new terms.\n- **Why**: Cognitive fatigue occurs when explanations introduce multiple competing mental models simultaneously.\n\n### Step 2: Formulate Simplified Explanation\n- **Action**: Deliver the re-pitch in short, structured bullet points:\n  1. What is the current problem?\n  2. What is the proposed change?\n  3. Why does this solve the problem cleanly?\n- **Inline Checklist**:\n  - [ ] Sentences average under 15 words\n  - [ ] Canonical domain vocabulary used\n  - [ ] Abstract metaphors replaced with concrete mechanics\n\n### Step 3: Align on Core Understanding\n- **Action**: Ask a single targeted question to verify comprehension before moving forward.\n- **Why**: Prevents continuing down a misaligned technical path.\n\n---\n\n## Anti-Rationalization Guardrails\n\n| Tempting Rationalization | Binding Rule | Engineering Rationale |\n|---|---|---|\n| *\"Repeat the previous explanation louder or with more words.\"* | **Re-pitch from a completely fresh, simpler baseline angle.** | Repeating the same explanation fails to address the root cognitive confusion. |\n| *\"Use complex industry analogies and metaphors.\"* | **Use concrete, direct technical English (STE).** | Analogies introduce leaky abstractions and hide technical realities. |\n| *\"Assume the user understood and start modifying files.\"* | **Confirm alignment with a clean question before acting.** | Proceeding without mutual clarity leads to rejected work and reverted PRs. |\n\n"
}