Please check the build logs for more information.
See Builds for ideas on how to fix a failed build, or Metadata for how to configure docs.rs builds.
If you believe this is docs.rs' fault, open an issue.
ReasonKit
The Reasoning Engine
"From Prompt to Cognitive Engineering." -- Turn Prompts into Protocols.
Auditable Reasoning for Production AI | Rust-Native | SSR/SSG Compatible
Website | Documentation | GitHub
The Problem We Solve
Most AI is a slot machine. Insert prompt -> pull lever -> hope for coherence.
ReasonKit is a factory. Input data -> execute protocol -> get deterministic, auditable output.
LLMs are fundamentally probabilistic. Same prompt -> different outputs. This creates critical failures:
| Failure | Impact | Our Solution |
|---|---|---|
| Inconsistency | Unreliable for production | Deterministic protocol execution |
| Hallucination | Dangerous falsehoods | Multi-source triangulation + adversarial critique |
| Opacity | No audit trail | Complete execution tracing with confidence scores |
We don't eliminate probability (impossible). We constrain it through structured protocols that force probabilistic outputs into deterministic execution paths.
Quick Start
# Install (Universal)
|
# Or via Cargo
# Run your first analysis
Note: Some CLI commands are scaffolded in v0.1.0. Core functionality (
mcp,serve-mcp,completions) is fully implemented.
30 seconds to structured reasoning.
ThinkTools: The 5-Step Reasoning Chain
Each ThinkTool acts as a variance reduction filter, transforming probabilistic outputs into increasingly deterministic reasoning paths.
The PowerCombo Process: Five cognitive operations that systematically reduce variance from raw LLM output (~85%) to protocol-constrained reasoning (~28%)
| ThinkTool | Operation | What It Does |
|---|---|---|
| GigaThink | Diverge() |
Generate 10+ perspectives, explore widely |
| LaserLogic | Converge() |
Detect fallacies, validate logic, find gaps |
| BedRock | Ground() |
First principles decomposition, identify axioms |
| ProofGuard | Verify() |
Multi-source triangulation, require 3+ sources |
| BrutalHonesty | Critique() |
Adversarial red team, attack your own reasoning |
Variance Reduction: The Chain Effect
Quantified Uncertainty Reduction: Each ThinkTool stage measurably constrains probabilistic variance
| Stage | Variance | Reduction |
|---|---|---|
| Raw LLM Output | 85% | -- |
| + GigaThink | 72% | -13% |
| + LaserLogic | 58% | -14% |
| + BedRock | 42% | -16% |
| + ProofGuard | 28% | -14% |
Result: Raw LLM variance ~85% -> Protocol-constrained variance ~28%
Reasoning Profiles
Pre-configured chains for different rigor levels:
# Fast analysis (70% confidence target)
# Standard analysis (80% confidence target)
# Thorough analysis (85% confidence target)
# Maximum rigor (95% confidence target)
| Profile | Chain | Confidence | Use Case |
|---|---|---|---|
--quick |
GigaThink -> LaserLogic | 70% | Fast sanity checks |
--balanced |
All 5 ThinkTools | 80% | Standard decisions |
--deep |
All 5 + meta-cognition | 85% | Complex problems |
--paranoid |
All 5 + validation pass | 95% | Critical decisions |
See It In Action
Live Execution Trace: Every reasoning step logged with confidence scores and variance metrics
$ rk-core think --profile balanced "Should we migrate to microservices?"
ThinkTool Chain: GigaThink -> LaserLogic -> BedRock -> ProofGuard
Variance: 85% -> 72% -> 58% -> 42% -> 28%
[GigaThink] 10 PERSPECTIVES GENERATED Variance: 85%
1. OPERATIONAL: Maintenance overhead +40% initially
2. TEAM TOPOLOGY: Conway's Law - do we have the teams?
3. COST ANALYSIS: Infrastructure scales non-linearly
...
-> Variance after exploration: 72% (-13%)
[LaserLogic] HIDDEN ASSUMPTIONS DETECTED Variance: 72%
! Assuming network latency is negligible
! Assuming team has distributed tracing expertise
! Logical gap: No evidence microservices solve stated problem
-> Variance after validation: 58% (-14%)
[BedRock] FIRST PRINCIPLES DECOMPOSITION Variance: 58%
* Axiom: Monoliths are simpler to reason about (empirical)
* Axiom: Distributed systems introduce partitions (CAP theorem)
* Gap: Cannot prove maintainability improvement without data
-> Variance after grounding: 42% (-16%)
[ProofGuard] TRIANGULATION RESULT Variance: 42%
* 3/5 sources: Microservices increase complexity initially
* 2/5 sources: Some teams report success
* Confidence: 0.72 (MEDIUM) - Mixed evidence
-> Variance after verification: 28% (-14%)
VERDICT: conditional_yes | Confidence: 87% | Duration: 2.3s
What This Shows:
- Transparency: See exactly where confidence comes from
- Auditability: Every step logged and verifiable
- Deterministic Path: Same protocol -> same execution flow
- Variance Reduction: Quantified uncertainty reduction at each stage
Architecture
Three-Layer Architecture: Deterministic protocol engine wrapping probabilistic LLM layer with full execution tracing
Three-Layer Architecture:
-
Probabilistic LLM (Unavoidable)
- LLMs generate tokens probabilistically
- Same prompt -> different outputs
- We cannot eliminate this
-
Deterministic Protocol Engine (Our Innovation)
- Wraps the probabilistic LLM layer
- Enforces strict execution paths
- Validates outputs against schemas
- State machine ensures consistent flow
-
ThinkTool Chain (Variance Reduction)
- Each ThinkTool reduces variance
- Multi-stage validation catches errors
- Confidence scoring quantifies uncertainty
Key Components:
- Protocol Engine: Orchestrates execution with strict state management
- ThinkTools: Modular cognitive operations with defined contracts
- LLM Integration: Unified client (Claude, GPT, Gemini, 18+ providers)
- Telemetry: Local SQLite for execution traces + variance metrics
flowchart LR
subgraph CLI["ReasonKit CLI (rk-core)"]
A[User Command<br/>rk-core think --profile balanced]
end
subgraph PROTOCOL["Deterministic Protocol Engine"]
B1[State Machine<br/>Execution Plan]
B2[ThinkTool Orchestrator]
B3[(SQLite Trace DB)]
end
subgraph LLM["LLM Layer (Probabilistic)"]
C1[Provider Router]
C2[Claude / GPT / Gemini / ...]
end
subgraph TOOLS["ThinkTools - Variance Reduction"]
G["GigaThink<br/>Diverge()"]
LZ["LaserLogic<br/>Converge()"]
BR["BedRock<br/>Ground()"]
PG["ProofGuard<br/>Verify()"]
BH["BrutalHonesty<br/>Critique()"]
end
A --> B1 --> B2 --> G --> LZ --> BR --> PG --> BH --> B3
B2 --> C1 --> C2 --> B2
classDef core fill:#030508,stroke:#06b6d4,stroke-width:1px,color:#f9fafb;
classDef tool fill:#0a0d14,stroke:#10b981,stroke-width:1px,color:#f9fafb;
classDef llm fill:#111827,stroke:#a855f7,stroke-width:1px,color:#f9fafb;
class CLI,PROTOCOL core;
class G,LZ,BR,PG,BH tool;
class LLM,llm C1,C2;
Built for Production
ReasonKit is written in Rust because reasoning infrastructure demands reliability.
| Capability | What It Means For You |
|---|---|
| Predictable Latency | <5ms orchestration overhead, no GC pauses |
| Memory Safety | Zero crashes from null pointers or buffer overflows |
| Single Binary | Deploy anywhere, no Python environment required |
| Fearless Concurrency | Run 100+ reasoning chains in parallel safely |
| Type Safety | Errors caught at compile time, not runtime |
Benchmarked Performance (view full report):
| Operation | Time | Target |
|---|---|---|
| Protocol orchestration | 4.4ms | <10ms |
| RRF Fusion (100 elements) | 33us | <5ms |
| Document chunking (10KB) | 27us | <5ms |
| RAPTOR tree traversal (1000 nodes) | 33us | <5ms |
Why This Matters:
Your AI reasoning shouldn't crash in production. It shouldn't pause for garbage collection during critical decisions. It shouldn't require complex environment management to deploy.
ReasonKit's Rust foundation ensures deterministic, auditable execution every time--the same engineering choice trusted by Linux, Cloudflare, Discord, and AWS for their most critical infrastructure.
Memory Infrastructure (Optional)
Memory modules (storage, embedding, retrieval, RAPTOR, indexing) are available in the standalone reasonkit-mem crate.
Enable the memory feature to use these modules:
[]
= { = "0.1", = ["memory"] }
Features:
- Qdrant vector database (embedded mode)
- Hybrid search (dense + sparse fusion)
- RAPTOR hierarchical retrieval
- Local embeddings (BGE-M3 ONNX)
- BM25 full-text search (Tantivy)
Installation
Primary Method (Universal):
|
# Cargo (Rust) - Recommended for Developers
# npm (Node.js) - CLI Wrapper
# uv (Python) - Bindings Only
Usage Examples
Standard Operations:
# Balanced analysis (5-step protocol)
# Quick sanity check (2-step protocol)
# Maximum rigor (paranoid mode)
# Scientific method (research & experiments)
With Memory (RAG):
# Ingest documents
# Query with RAG
# View execution traces
Contributing: The 5 Gates of Quality
We demand excellence. All contributions must pass The 5 Gates of Quality:
# Clone & Setup
# The 5 Gates (MANDATORY)
Quality Score Target: 8.0/10 minimum for release.
See CONTRIBUTING.md for complete guidelines.
Design Philosophy: Honest Engineering
We don't claim to eliminate probability. That's impossible. LLMs are probabilistic by design.
We do claim to constrain it. Through structured protocols, multi-stage validation, and deterministic execution paths, we transform probabilistic token generation into auditable reasoning chains.
| What We Battle | How We Battle It | What We're Honest About |
|---|---|---|
| Inconsistency | Deterministic protocol execution | LLM outputs still vary, but execution paths don't |
| Hallucination | Multi-source triangulation, adversarial critique | Can't eliminate, but can detect and flag |
| Opacity | Full execution tracing, confidence scoring | Transparency doesn't guarantee correctness |
| Uncertainty | Explicit confidence metrics, variance reduction | We quantify uncertainty, not eliminate it |
License
Apache 2.0 - See LICENSE
Open Source Core: All core reasoning protocols and ThinkTools are open source under Apache 2.0.