Free Agent Skill
Feynman Teachback
Test and build genuine understanding of a concept using the Feynman technique — explain it as simply as possible, notice exactly where the simple explanation breaks down, and treat that break point as the thing to actually go learn.
Use when: the user wants to check if they really understand something (not just recognize it), asks for something to be explained simply or "like I'm five," is studying or preparing to teach/present something, or gives an explanation that leans heavily on jargon which may be covering for a gap.
Install this skill
- Create a folder named `feynman-teachback`.
- Save the skill content below as `SKILL.md` inside that folder.
- Place the folder in `~/.codex/skills/` for Codex, `.cursor/skills/` for Cursor or `.claude/skills/` for Claude Code.
- Describe the task normally. Your agent loads the skill when its description matches.
---
name: feynman-teachback
description: Test and build genuine understanding of a concept using the Feynman technique — explain it as simply as possible, notice exactly where the simple explanation breaks down, and treat that break point as the thing to actually go learn. Use whenever the user wants to check if they really understand something (not just recognize it), asks for something to be explained simply or "like I'm five," is studying or preparing to teach/present something, or gives an explanation that leans heavily on jargon which may be covering for a gap.
---
# Feynman Teachback
Recognizing a concept and understanding it are different things, and
jargon makes it easy to mistake one for the other. This skill uses
simplification as a diagnostic: the point where a simple explanation
breaks down is exactly the point worth studying next.
## The technique
**1. Explain it as if to a smart person outside the field.** No jargon
without immediately defining it in plain terms. If a term can't be
unpacked simply, that's already informative — flag it rather than
gliding past it.
**2. Notice exactly where it gets hard.** While simplifying, there's
usually a specific point where the explanation wants to reach for jargon,
hand-wave, or say "it's complicated." Don't smooth over that moment — name
it explicitly: "this is the part I'm actually unsure about" or "this is
where I'm restating the term rather than explaining the mechanism."
**3. Go back and fill the gap.** Once the sticking point is named, that's
the actual thing to research or think through — not the whole topic
again. This is what makes the technique efficient: it targets the real
gap instead of re-reviewing everything.
**4. Re-explain, simpler than the first pass.** A second pass after
filling the gap should be shorter and use more everyday analogies, not
more precise terminology. If it got more complicated, the gap wasn't
actually filled — it was just described more thoroughly.
## When the user is explaining something to Sage
If the user is the one explaining a concept (to check their own
understanding, or while drafting a presentation), listen for:
- Places where they use a technical term to stand in for a mechanism
without describing the mechanism.
- Places where the explanation would fall apart under a genuinely naive
follow-up question ("but why does that happen?").
Ask that naive follow-up question directly rather than accepting the
jargon. This is more useful than praising the explanation — the goal is
finding the gap, not confirming the explanation.
## Output
Either: a simplified explanation with the sticking point explicitly
flagged, or a pointed follow-up question aimed at a specific gap in the
user's own explanation — not generic encouragement.
More free skills
Prompt Refiner
Turns a vague request into an executable brief without silently inventing missing requirements.
Decision Framer
Separates the real choice from noise, then tests options against explicit criteria and uncertainty.
Meeting to Actions
Converts messy notes into decisions, owned actions, deadlines and unresolved questions.
Calibrated Forecasting
Turn a vague prediction or unstated confidence level into an explicit, calibrated probability estimate, following the practices Philip Tetlock found separated "superforecasters" from everyone else — breaking questions into sub-questions, checking base rates, updating in small increments as new information arrives, and tracking predictions against outcomes.
Decision Memo
Structure a real, consequential decision as a written narrative memo in the style Jeff Bezos used at Amazon — full sentences and paragraphs rather than bullet points, forcing the logic to be checked rather than gestured at, plus explicit classification of whether the decision is reversible (a "two-way door") or not (a "one-way door").
First Principles
Rebuild a problem from fundamental truths (physics, economics, unit costs, what's actually true regardless of convention) rather than by analogy to how things are normally done — the reasoning style associated with Elon Musk's approach to manufacturing cost problems and Richard Feynman's approach to physics problems.
Focus and Tradeoffs
Cut a bloated plan, roadmap, or list of priorities down to the one or two things that actually matter, in the tradition associated with Steve Jobs's product focus — "innovation is saying no to a thousand things."
Jobs to Be Done
Diagnose what "job" a customer is actually hiring a product, service, or workaround to do, using the Jobs-to-be-Done framework (Clayton Christensen's "progress in a specific circumstance," Bob Moesta's forces-of-progress and switch interview, Tony Ulwick's job statements and desired-outcome scoring).
Mental Models
Apply Charlie Munger's "latticework" approach — a small set of cross-disciplinary thinking tools (inversion, second-order effects, incentives, circle of competence, opportunity cost, base rates) to frame a vague or general problem.
Moat Analysis
Assess whether a competitive advantage is durable (a real "moat," in Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger's terms) or temporary, by checking it against the standard sources of durable advantage — switching costs, network effects, economies of scale, brand/trust, and regulatory or IP protection — rather than taking "we're ahead right now" at face value.
Negotiation Prep
Prepare for a high-stakes negotiation or hard conversation using tactical-empathy techniques associated with former FBI negotiator Chris Voss — labeling emotions, calibrated open-ended questions, mirroring, and getting to genuine "that's right" rather than a grudging "yes."
Postmortem / Retro
Extract a specific, reusable lesson after something succeeded or failed, following the principle (associated with Ray Dalio's "pain plus reflection equals progress") that outcomes only compound into better judgment if they're deliberately converted into a written, checkable lesson rather than just felt and moved past.
Premortem
Run a premortem — psychologist Gary Klein's technique of imagining a plan has already failed and working backward to explain why, which surfaces risks that forward planning misses because it counteracts the social and psychological pressure to seem confident.
Want this skill connected to a complete workflow?
Every skill is free and works independently. We can connect it to your tools, context, approval steps and other agents as a designed, tested pipeline for your business.