Claude Code Plugins

Community-maintained marketplace

Feedback

Developer inquiry skill for technical investigation, validation, and decision-making. Use when exploring unfamiliar technology, validating approaches with spikes, comparing options, or making architecture decisions. Covers the full thinking process from "I don't know" to confident decision.

Install Skill

1Download skill
2Enable skills in Claude

Open claude.ai/settings/capabilities and find the "Skills" section

3Upload to Claude

Click "Upload skill" and select the downloaded ZIP file

Note: Please verify skill by going through its instructions before using it.

SKILL.md

name dev-inquiry
description Developer inquiry skill for technical investigation, validation, and decision-making. Use when exploring unfamiliar technology, validating approaches with spikes, comparing options, or making architecture decisions. Covers the full thinking process from "I don't know" to confident decision.

Dev Inquiry

Feynman-style technical inquiry for developers. Understand before you decide. Validate before you build.

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool." — Richard Feynman

Inquiry Modes

This skill supports four modes that often chain together:

Mode When to Use Trigger Phrases
Investigate Understand something unfamiliar "explore", "understand", "how does X work"
Spike Validate approach before building "spike", "validate", "prove this works"
Compare Evaluate options for your context "compare", "vs", "which is better"
Decide Make a concrete choice "should we", "decide", "recommend"

How to Use This Skill

  1. Identify the mode from the user's request
  2. Load the appropriate reference:
    • Investigation → Read references/investigation.md
    • Spike validation → Read references/spike.md
    • Comparison → Read references/scoring.md
    • Decision → Read references/scoring.md (uses comparison + decision framework)
  3. Follow the workflow in that reference
  4. Chain if needed — investigation often leads to spike, spike informs comparison

Mode Details

Investigate Mode

For understanding unfamiliar technology from first principles.

Process: Admit ignorance → Simplest experiment → Poke edges → Build mental model → Explain simply

Output: Mental model you can teach to someone else

Spike Mode

For validating technical feasibility before full implementation.

Process: Define scope (4-8 hours) → Write tests first → Implement minimal → Test with real data → Document pattern

Output: Proven pattern ready to replicate, or pivot decision

Compare Mode

For evaluating multiple options against your specific context.

Process: Define context → Choose criteria → Weight by importance → Score with evidence → Sanity check

Output: Weighted comparison matrix with evidence

Decide Mode

For making a concrete choice with documented reasoning.

Process: Ensure understanding (investigate if needed) → Compare options → State recommendation → Document tradeoffs → Assess reversibility

Output: Clear recommendation with rationale and risks

The Natural Flow

"Let's explore @Observable"
        ↓ Investigation
"Can I actually build nested observation?"
        ↓ Spike (validates understanding)
"@Observable vs @StateObject for my app"
        ↓ Comparison
"Should we adopt the new Observation framework?"
        ↓ Decision

Each mode builds on the previous. Don't decide before you understand. Don't compare before you investigate.

Quick Reference

Request Mode Reference
"Let's explore Swift macros" Investigate references/investigation.md
"I want to understand async/await" Investigate references/investigation.md
"Spike SwiftData before we commit" Spike references/spike.md
"Validate this architecture works" Spike references/spike.md
"Compare REST vs GraphQL" Compare references/scoring.md
"SwiftData vs CoreData?" Compare references/scoring.md
"Should we use Combine?" Decide references/scoring.md
"Recommend an approach" Decide references/scoring.md

Examples

For concrete examples across all modes, see references/examples.md.