RTFM

A practical manual for interacting with me.

This is not a a demand that everyone should adapt to me. It is a guide to the conditions under which I tend to think clearly, communicate well, and do good work. It is also a map of the situations where I am likely to become harder to work with.

TL;DR version

I work best when the goal is clear, the work is interesting, and the next action is concrete.

I can perform very well when I understand the problem, care about the outcome, and have room to think, build, reason, or solve. I struggle more with vague obligations, long-running routine tasks, loose follow-up, hidden expectations, and work that depends on remembering many small details at the right time.

If you want the best out of me:

• Be direct.
• Be specific.
• Put important things in writing.
• Give me context and constraints, not just tasks.
• Do not rely on me remembering something only because it was mentioned once.
• Expect strong reasoning, but do not mistake intensity for hostility.

How My Brain Tends To Work

My attention is interest-driven. That does not mean I only do things I like. It means that urgency, novelty, meaning, technical depth, and clear stakes make my brain engage much more reliably than routine, repetition, or loosely defined obligation.

When something clicks, I can go deep, fast, and for a long time. I can hold a complex system in my head, find patterns, design solutions, and push through difficult problems. When something feels pointless, underspecified, bureaucratic, or disconnected from a clear outcome, task initiation and follow-through become much harder.

The common failure mode is not lack of caring. It is friction at the boundary between intention and execution.

Communication

What Works Well

Use direct language. I prefer clarity over cushioning. If something is wrong, blocked, risky, late, unclear, or frustrating, say that plainly.

Make the actual ask explicit. A message like "Can you look at this?" can mean review, approve, debug, estimate, rewrite, decide, or just be aware. I do better with "Please review this for correctness by Friday" or "I need a yes/no decision."

Separate facts, opinions, and requests. I respond well when I can tell which part is evidence, which part is interpretation, and which part needs action.

Give me the reason. I am much more engaged when I understand the why behind a decision, constraint, or request. "Because the customer needs it" is useful. "Because process" usually is not.

What Does Not Work Well

Hints, implication, and indirect dissatisfaction are unreliable. If you expect me to infer the real issue from tone or subtext, there is a decent chance I will miss it or focus on the wrong part.

Long verbal instructions are fragile. I may understand them in the moment and still lose details later. If it matters, write it down.

Ambiguous ownership creates drift. If everyone kind of owns something, assume I may not treat it as mine unless that has been made explicit.

Meetings

Meetings are best when they have a purpose, an owner, and a decision path.

I am useful in meetings where we are solving a problem, making a decision, reviewing something concrete, or surfacing risks. I am much less useful in meetings that exist mainly to keep everyone loosely synchronized without clear outcomes.

Good meeting patterns:

• Send context beforehand if the topic is complex.
• Start with the decision or outcome needed.
• Name who owns each follow-up.
• Put action items in writing before the meeting ends.
• If my input is needed, say which kind: technical opinion, decision, risk review, estimate, or brainstorming.

If a meeting changes topic suddenly, I may need a moment to reorient. That pause is usually me switching mental models, not disengaging.

Work Style

I am strongest in work that involves understanding, designing, debugging, building, explaining, and improving systems.

I am weaker in work that requires sustained routine administration, repeated manual follow-up, fine-grained scheduling, or remembering lots of disconnected obligations without external structure.

Useful ways to work with me:

• Give me a problem to own, not just a list of chores.
• Define success clearly.
• Keep constraints visible.
• Use written tickets, checklists, docs, or shared notes.
• Use deadlines when they are real, not as vague pressure.

If something is important but boring, the structure matters more. A clear checklist, a short deadline, or an external review point can make the difference between "done" and "somehow still not done."

Planning And Follow-Through

I use tools because memory is not a reliable system. Calendars, reminders, written notes, tickets, and visible task lists help turn intention into action.

Please do not treat "I told you once" as a robust delivery mechanism for important information.

Good patterns:

• Put dates and times in calendar invites.
• Put decisions and commitments in writing.
• Use one source of truth when possible.
• Make the next action visible.
• Follow up with a concise reminder if something matters.

Bad patterns:

• Relying on a hallway conversation.
• Assuming I will remember an implied deadline.
• Spreading obligations across chat, email, voice, and memory.
• Treating a vague "sometime soon" as a plan.

Detail And Quality

I can reason well about systems and concepts, but detail tracking can be uneven, especially on low-stimulation or repetitive tasks. I may see the architecture and miss the typo. I may understand the plan and still forget a small follow-up.

This is why review loops matter. For important work, I prefer systems that catch errors instead of relying on heroic attention.

Useful supports:

• Checklists.
• Written acceptance criteria.
• Explicit definitions of done.
• A second pass for details after the main thinking is complete.

Feedback

I prefer feedback that is direct, specific, and actionable.

Good feedback:

• "This section is too abstract. Please add a concrete example."
• "You interrupted twice in that meeting. Let the other person finish before responding."
• "The solution works, but the maintenance cost is too high because of X."

Less useful feedback:

• "Be more mindful."
• "This feels off."
• "You should know what I mean."

If you think I am being too forceful, too blunt, too detailed, or too persistent, say so directly. I may not always notice the social effect quickly enough in the moment, especially when I am focused on the content. My mouth is faster than my brain, and sometimes I'll speak out of turn because else I will forget what I wanted to say.

Disagreement And Conflict

I can become attached to a line of reasoning when I think the logic matters. This can look like stubbornness, intensity, or unwillingness to move on.

What usually helps:

• Bring the disagreement back to the goal.
• Name the tradeoff we are deciding between.
• Ask what evidence would change my mind.
• Timebox the discussion if we are stuck.
• Separate "you are wrong" from "we are choosing a different constraint."

I respect strong arguments. I do not need people to agree with me. I do need the reasoning to be explicit enough that I can understand what is being optimized.

Sensory Load And Environment

Noise and repeated small sensory irritations can consume more attention than I want them to. Some sounds or environments may make me impatient, distracted, or eager to leave.

This is not always visible from the outside. If I move seats, use headphones, step away, or become quieter, it may be an attempt to manage input rather than a reaction to the people around me.

Helpful defaults:

• I'll use headphones when focus matters.
• Prefer quieter spaces for complex conversations.
• Do not take it personally if I need to change location.
• For important topics, avoid trying to discuss them in noisy or chaotic settings. In noisy environments with competing sounds I literally cannot hear what you're saying.

Social Interaction

I can talk too long about things I find interesting. I can also be too quick to jump in, correct, solve, or add context.

If this happens, it is fine to interrupt the pattern directly:

• "Short version?"
• "Can you pause there?"
• "I need a decision, not the full model."
• "Let's come back to that later."
• "I want to finish my thought first."

I would rather be redirected clearly than have someone silently disengage.

How To Ask Me For Something

A good request contains:

• The outcome you want.
• Why it matters.
• When it is needed.
• What constraints apply.
• Whether you want speed, quality, exploration, or a final decision.

Example:

Please review this proposal for technical risk by Thursday afternoon. I do not need wording edits; I need to know whether the approach will hold up in production and what the biggest unknowns are.

That kind of request is much easier for me to act on than:

Can you take a look?

What To Do If I Am Stuck

If I am avoiding, delaying, circling, or overthinking something, these interventions often help:

• Ask me to define the next physical action.
• Reduce the scope.
• Ask for a rough first pass.
• Create a short deadline.
• Pair for 20 minutes.
• Ask what information is missing.
• Ask what part feels pointless, risky, or unclear.

What I Am Responsible For

I am responsible for how I show up, how I affect people, and how I manage my own systems.

You can expect me to:

• Own my commitments.
• Ask for clarification when I notice ambiguity.
• Repair when I have been too blunt, too intense, or too absent.
• Keep improving the systems that help me function well.

Best Defaults

If in doubt:

• Write it down.
• Be direct.
• Make the next action clear.
• Explain the why.
• Use concrete deadlines.
• Give feedback early.
• Assume intensity is often focus, not aggression.
• Ask for the short version when you need it.

The goal is simple: fewer hidden expectations, fewer dropped details, better work, and less friction.