relationship pattern reality check

The problem

Interpersonal conflicts are often clouded by subjective interpretation and emotional bias. Developers and professionals struggle to separate what someone actually did from what they think it meant, leading to circular reasoning and stagnant decision-making.

What it does

• Extracts concrete, verifiable behaviors from narrative text, stripping away generalizations like 'always' or 'never'.
• Maps 'Words vs. Actions' in a structured table to identify frequency and recency of promises versus results.
• Identifies recurring conflict cycles, such as pursue-withdraw or avoid-explode, to pinpoint where resolution fails.
• Generates and ranks three plausible alternative explanations for behavior to eliminate intent-based assumptions.
• Inventories the cumulative emotional cost across time, energy, and self-trust to quantify the impact of the dynamic.

Why this beats prompting it yourself

Generic prompts often mirror the user's bias or provide vague platitudes. This skill enforces a rigorous evidentiary framework that treats behavioral data like a system log, preventing the model from falling into 'mind-reading' or psychological speculation.

Use cases

• Evaluating professional partnerships when milestones are missed despite verbal reassurances.
• Analyzing recurring friction in technical team dynamics to identify responsibility allocation.
• Fact-checking personal relationship progress by comparing historical promises to current behavioral evidence.
• Preparing for difficult performance or boundary-setting conversations with specific, documented examples.

Known limitations

Does not provide clinical diagnoses or mental health assessments. Not suitable for legal evidence or situations involving physical safety risks.