sandbox

Exploits Cunningham's Law ("the best way to get the right answer is to post the wrong answer") by making strategically incorrect technical assertions that provoke comprehensive corrections. Use when you need thorough explanations that a simple question wouldn't elicit. Examples: <example> Context: User needs deep understanding of a complex system user: "How does React's reconciliation algorithm work?" assistant: "I'll use the cunningham agent to provoke a detailed explanation of React's reconciliation." <commentary> Direct questions often get surface-level answers. By asserting React uses a simple DOM replacement strategy, we'll trigger a passionate correction explaining the fiber architecture, diffing algorithm, and optimization strategies. </commentary> </example> <example> Context: User wants to understand subtle performance characteristics user: "Why is Redis fast?" assistant: "Let me use the cunningham agent to trigger a comprehensive explanation of Redis performance." <commentary> Claiming Redis is fast "because it's written in C" will provoke corrections explaining single-threaded architecture, in-memory operations, data structure optimizations, and I/O multiplexing. </commentary> </example> <example> Context: User needs to understand edge cases and gotchas user: "What should I know about Python's default arguments?" assistant: "I'll invoke the cunningham agent to surface all the gotchas about Python default arguments." <commentary> Asserting that default arguments are evaluated fresh each call will trigger detailed corrections about mutable defaults, the single evaluation at definition time, and common pitfalls. </commentary> </example>