Skills reasoning-counterfactual
📦
reasoning-counterfactual
Content revision r1 Safe ⚙️ External commands
Evaluate Counterfactual Decisions
Teams often struggle to learn from decisions without overfitting to hindsight. This skill structures counterfactual analysis with minimal interventions, probability weights, and clear comparison outputs.
Supports: Claude Codex Code(CC)
Install with my Agent
Copy this request to your Agent. It includes the canonical Skill page and manifest.
Agent request
Review the Skillstore skill "reasoning-counterfactual" from https://skillstore.io/skills/bellabe-reasoning-counterfactual.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/bellabe-reasoning-counterfactual/manifest. Verify the artifact. You may proceed after verification, subject to the environment's own policy.Your Agent should still show its plan and request any confirmation required by the security policy.
Agent-readable resources
Use these links when an AI agent, crawler, or script needs clean context instead of reading the full page.
Test it
Using "reasoning-counterfactual". Should we have lowered enterprise pricing before launch?
Expected outcome:
- The lower price alternative likely improves sales velocity and deal count.
- The expected revenue gain is moderate because each deal is smaller.
- Confidence is medium because customer quality and sales behavior remain uncertain.
- Recommendation: test a lower entry tier before changing the whole pricing model.
Using "reasoning-counterfactual". What if we had accepted funding instead of staying bootstrapped?
Expected outcome:
- The funded path likely increases growth speed and hiring capacity.
- Ownership dilution reduces part of the financial upside.
- The two paths appear similar in expected value but differ in risk profile.
- Recommendation: use funding only if growth constraints become the main blocker.
Using "reasoning-counterfactual". What if we delayed launch by one quarter to improve quality?
Expected outcome:
- The delayed launch likely reduces early support issues and improves retention.
- It also postpones customer learning and near-term revenue.
- The better choice depends on defect severity and runway pressure.
- Recommendation: compare delay cost against the expected churn reduction.
Security Audit
Safev8 • 7/6/2026 Open versioned report
All static findings are false positives caused by Markdown code fences and ordinary reasoning text in SKILL.md. No evidence found of prompt injection, command execution, data exfiltration, system reconnaissance, filesystem access, or network behavior.
1
Files scanned
448
Lines analyzed
0
Review items
0
False positives ignored
Risk Factors
⚙️ External commands (25)
SKILL.md:12-20 SKILL.md:20-66 SKILL.md:66-91 SKILL.md:91-94 SKILL.md:94-129 SKILL.md:129-146 SKILL.md:146-164 SKILL.md:164-167 SKILL.md:167-190 SKILL.md:190-204 SKILL.md:204-248 SKILL.md:248-255 SKILL.md:255-306 SKILL.md:306-347 SKILL.md:347-364 SKILL.md:364-368 SKILL.md:368-408 SKILL.md:408-415 SKILL.md:415-419 SKILL.md:419-422 SKILL.md:422-426 SKILL.md:426-429 SKILL.md:429-436 SKILL.md:436-439 SKILL.md:439-447
No confirmed security findings were detected by the latest completed static and semantic audit. This does not prove the skill has no side effects.
Audited by: codex View Audit History →
Share & cite this report
Share the versioned assessment report, neutral badge, embed card, and citations. Skillstore reports evidence without deciding whether this Skill is safe.
Copy report link
https://skillstore.io/skills/bellabe-reasoning-counterfactual/audits/8?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_reportMarkdown badge
[](https://skillstore.io/skills/bellabe-reasoning-counterfactual?utm_source=security_passport_badge)HTML badge
<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/bellabe-reasoning-counterfactual?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/bellabe-reasoning-counterfactual/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>Embed card
<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/bellabe-reasoning-counterfactual.html" title="Skillstore Security Assessment" sandbox="allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer" width="420" height="180"></iframe>Academic citations (APA · BibTeX · CFF)
APA citation
BellaBe. (2026). reasoning-counterfactual security audit report (audit version 8) [Author version unspecified]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/bellabe-reasoning-counterfactual/audits/8BibTeX citation
@techreport{bellabe-bellabe-reasoning-counterfactual-2026,
author = {BellaBe},
title = {reasoning-counterfactual security audit report (audit version 8)},
institution = {Skillstore},
year = {2026},
number = {8},
url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/bellabe-reasoning-counterfactual/audits/8},
note = {Author version unspecified}
}CITATION.cff
cff-version: 1.2.0
message: "If you use this Skill, cite its author and this versioned security audit report."
title: "reasoning-counterfactual security audit report (audit version 8)"
version: "unspecified"
type: report
authors:
- name: "BellaBe"
date-released: "2026-07-06"
url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/bellabe-reasoning-counterfactual/audits/8"
identifiers:
- type: other
value: "skillstore:bellabe-reasoning-counterfactual:audit:8"
description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"
Skillstore Score
Why this score Evidence Confidence: High 55
Architecture
85
Maintainability
87
Content
70
Community
83
Spec Compliance
What You Can Build
Review a product decision
Assess whether a launch, pricing, or roadmap choice likely outperformed available alternatives.
Plan a strategic scenario
Compare likely outcomes if a competitor, market, or internal constraint changes.
Learn from past outcomes
Convert a completed project result into practical lessons for future decisions.
Try These Prompts
Basic decision review
Use counterfactual reasoning to evaluate this decision: [decision]. Actual outcome: [outcome]. Alternative to test: [alternative].
Compare business options
Analyze what likely would have changed if we chose [option B] instead of [option A]. Include assumptions, probabilities, and tradeoffs.
Assess a strategic intervention
Model expected, optimistic, and pessimistic outcomes for this intervention: [intervention]. Compare against our current path using probability weights.
Run a multi-intervention retrospective
Evaluate these alternatives to our actual decision: [alternatives]. Rank them by outcome quality, confidence, feasibility, and lessons for future action.
Best Practices
- State the actual decision, date, context, and observed outcome before testing alternatives.
- Change one variable at a time and document assumptions that remain constant.
- Use probability weights and confidence levels instead of single certain outcomes.
Avoid
- Do not judge the past using information that was unavailable at the time.
- Do not compare alternatives without explaining the causal chain behind each outcome.
- Do not treat speculative projections as proof of what would have happened.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
It compares actual outcomes with plausible alternative outcomes to improve decisions and learning.
Can it predict the exact alternative outcome?
No. It estimates plausible outcomes with probabilities and clearly stated uncertainty.
What information should I provide?
Provide the actual decision, timing, context, outcome, metrics, and the alternative you want to test.
Does it work for future planning?
Yes. It can evaluate hypothetical future interventions when assumptions and success metrics are clear.
How is this different from causal reasoning?
Causal reasoning explains why something happened. Counterfactual reasoning compares what happened with plausible alternatives.
Which tools can use this skill?
The report lists support for Claude, Codex, and Claude Code.