"Facts that need pointing out, although they are plain on inspection" is a not-too-inaccurate paraphrase of the definition "class NP problems" in computer science. You aren't describing a failure of rationality, but a very basic limitation of knowledge generally: it's harder to solve a problem (how can I toast marshmallows in my studio) than to verify that a proposed solution works (put them in the oven).
But this fun remark ignores the intended meaning...
Today I learned that you can toast marshmallows in the oven.
By "learned", I mean "I read a recipe which included as a step toasting marshmallows in the oven". I didn't have to try it out to realize that this would obviously work. It was plain as soon as I heard the idea. And it shouldn't have needed pointing out. I know how ovens work. I am familiar with the marshmallow species of food. I love roasted marshmallows while hating them in most other forms and often occurrently lament the difficulty of arranging open flames over which one may safely toast them. I routinely try new things in the kitchen to get results I want.
And yet I read it, and was surprised. And so were the people I reported this finding to. It needed pointing out.
What other facts need pointing out, although they are plain on inspection? What is the pattern behind these facts and a good way to find more?