abstraction-concrete-examples

What this skill does

# Abstraction Ladder Framework

## Table of Contents

- [Workflow](#workflow)
  - [1. Gather Requirements](#1-gather-requirements)
  - [2. Choose Approach](#2-choose-approach)
  - [3. Build the Ladder](#3-build-the-ladder)
  - [4. Validate Quality](#4-validate-quality)
  - [5. Deliver and Explain](#5-deliver-and-explain)
- [Common Patterns](#common-patterns)
- [Guardrails](#guardrails)
- [Quick Reference](#quick-reference)

The ladder uses 3-5 levels connecting universal principles to concrete details. Example:
- L1: "Software should be maintainable"
- L2: "Use modular architecture"
- L3: "Apply dependency injection"
- L4: "UserService injects IUserRepository"
- L5: `constructor(private repo: IUserRepository) {}`

## Workflow

Copy this checklist and track your progress:

```
Abstraction Ladder Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Gather requirements
- [ ] Step 2: Choose approach
- [ ] Step 3: Build the ladder
- [ ] Step 4: Validate quality
- [ ] Step 5: Deliver and explain
```

**Step 1: Gather requirements**

Ask the user to clarify topic, purpose, audience, scope (suggest 4 levels), and starting point (top-down, bottom-up, or middle-out). This ensures the ladder serves the user's actual need.

**Step 2: Choose approach**

For straightforward cases with clear topics → Use `resources/template.md`. For complex cases with multiple parallel ladders or unusual constraints → Study `resources/methodology.md`. To see examples → Show user `resources/examples/` (api-design.md, hiring-process.md).

**Step 3: Build the ladder**

Create `abstraction-concrete-examples.md` with topic, 3-5 distinct abstraction levels, connections between levels, and 2-3 edge cases. Ensure top level is universal, bottom level has measurable specifics, and transitions are logical. Direction options: top-down (principle → examples), bottom-up (observations → principles), or middle-out (familiar → both directions).

**Step 4: Validate quality**

Self-assess using `resources/evaluators/rubric_abstraction_concrete_examples.json`. Check: each level is distinct, transitions are clear, top level is universal, bottom level is specific, edge cases reveal insights, assumptions are stated, no topic drift, serves stated purpose. Minimum standard: Average score ≥ 3.5. If any criterion < 3, revise before delivering.

**Step 5: Deliver and explain**

Present the completed `abstraction-concrete-examples.md` file. Highlight key insights revealed by the ladder, note interesting edge cases or tensions discovered, and suggest applications based on their original purpose.

## Common Patterns

**For communication across levels:**
- Share L1-L2 with executives (strategy/principles)
- Share L2-L3 with managers (approaches/methods)
- Share L3-L5 with implementers (details/specifics)

**For validation:**
- Check if L5 reality matches L1 principles
- Identify gaps between adjacent levels
- Find where principles break down

**For design:**
- Use L1-L2 to guide decisions
- Use L3-L4 to specify requirements
- Use L5 for actual implementation

## Guardrails

**Do:**
- State assumptions explicitly at each level
- Test edge cases that challenge the principles
- Make concrete levels truly concrete (numbers, measurements, specifics)
- Make abstract levels broadly applicable (not domain-locked)
- Ensure each level is understandable given the previous level

**Don't:**
- Use vague language ("good", "better", "appropriate") without defining terms
- Make huge conceptual jumps between levels
- Let different levels drift to different topics
- Skip the validation step (the rubric check ensures quality)
- Front-load expertise - explain clearly for the target audience

## Quick Reference

- **Template for standard cases**: `resources/template.md`
- **Methodology for complex cases**: `resources/methodology.md`
- **Examples to study**: `resources/examples/api-design.md`, `resources/examples/hiring-process.md`
- **Quality rubric**: `resources/evaluators/rubric_abstraction_concrete_examples.json`