agentleFS
Data-WiseData-Wise/craft/skills/workflow/brainstorm/SKILL.md

brainstorm

Skill4 starsChanged 12 days agoMITView on GitHub

This skill should be used when the user asks to "brainstorm", "explore ideas", "design a feature", "draft a spec", "capture a spec", or mentions ideation, requirements gathering, spec capture, or brainstorming depth/focus modes. Generates BRAINSTORM/SPEC documents from project + conversation context. Replaces the deprecated /craft:brainstorm command. For session-facet friction or pattern analysis across past sessions, use the brainstorm-insights skill instead.

189 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use playtest-report, team-polish and 10 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • CoralGameSkill

    playtest-report

    Generates a structured playtest report template or analyzes existing playtest notes into a structured format. Use this to standardize playtest feedback collection and analysis.

    Also in 9 projects that use this

  • CoralGameSkill

    team-polish

    Orchestrate the polish team: coordinates performance-analyst, technical-artist, sound-designer, and qa-tester to optimize, polish, and harden a feature or area for release quality.

    Also in 11 projects that use this

  • lilangMaxSkill

    soak-test

    Generate a soak test protocol for extended play sessions. Defines what to observe, measure, and log during long play sessions to surface slow leaks, fatigue effects, and edge cases that only appear after sustained play. Primarily used in Polish and Release phases.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • lilangMaxSkill

    team-live-ops

    Orchestrate the live-ops team for post-launch content planning: coordinates live-ops-designer, economy-designer, analytics-engineer, community-manager, writer, and narrative-director to design and plan a season, event, or live content update.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • +8 more from CoralGame

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 156 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 5

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    If the user wants more, they ask.

    line 46
  2. Very specific:

    Parse args / detect topic: If no topic, scan conversation, .STATUS, git branch, recent commits.

    line 50
  3. Very specific:

    Context scan: Check for an existing SPEC or prior brainstorm on the topic, project type, .STATUS version, recent test failures.

    line 55
  4. Very specific:

    Default category selection is focus-driven (see table below).

    line 66
  5. Distinctive:

    Default categories by focus:

    line 82
  6. Distinctive:

    One follow-up offer: After the questions: "Anything else to add, or ready to generate?" — single yes/no-shaped prompt, not a menu of depth …

    line 96
  7. Very specific:

    Instead: after a spec is captured (Step 7), offer to hand off to the orchestrator via the existing --orch flag / plan-orchestrator skill / …

    line 118
  8. Very specific:

    When this skill emits a BRAINSTORM or SPEC artifact, it also emits a test-plan scaffold by default.

    line 148

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 156 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Brainstorm

ADHD-friendly ideation with two decision points (not four) and one escape hatch (not a "switch depth" tree). Transforms a topic + project/git context into a BRAINSTORM-<topic>-<date>.md or, with the save action, a docs/specs/SPEC-<topic>-<date>.md.

Boundary With Adjacent Skills

SkillRole
brainstorm (this)Generates BRAINSTORM/SPEC documents from topic + context
brainstorm-insightsAggregates session facet history into a friction/goals report — unrelated input, unrelated output, split out into its own concern (kept the directory name for path stability; only the Insights operation remains there)
insights-applyConsumes a brainstorm-insights report; writes suggestions into CLAUDE.md
adhd-workflowSession boundary ops (done, recap, next, focus, stuck, spec-review)
project-plannerProject-scope planning after a SPEC exists
plan-orchestrator / --orch flagMulti-agent implementation planning — see "Going deeper" below

Typical chain: brainstorm → SPEC → project-planner (breakdown) → adhd-workflow (spec-review/done).

Inputs

  • Topic — explicit argument, or inferred from conversation / .STATUS / git branch / recent commits.
  • Depth (quick | default | deep) — controls question count. No "max" tier — see "Going deeper" below for why.
  • Focus (feat | arch | ux | api | ui | ops) — shapes output sections.
  • Action (optional save) — capture as SPEC-<topic>-<date>.md.

Depth Budgets

DepthTimeExpert Questions
quick< 1 min0
default< 5 min2
deep< 10 min6

Two decision points total per session: (1) depth+focus, asked together in one AskUserQuestion call when not provided as arguments; (2) one optional follow-up — "anything else before I generate this?" — offered once, after the expert questions, regardless of depth. No per-depth escape-hatch menus, no "switch depth mid-flow," no milestone re-prompting every N questions. If the user wants more, they ask; don't build a state machine for it.

Flow

  1. Parse args / detect topic. If no topic, scan conversation, .STATUS, git branch, recent commits. 1 topic → use it; 2+ → one AskUserQuestion; none → ask free-form.
  2. Pick depth + focus (if not provided as arguments) — single AskUserQuestion call combining both, not two sequential menus.
  3. Context scan. Check for an existing SPEC or prior brainstorm on the topic, project type, .STATUS version, recent test failures. Pre-fill answers where project state already answers a question.
  4. Expert questions. Per-depth count (0/2/6), from the question bank (full text and selection logic). 8 categories × 2 questions = 16 base questions, plus 6 project-type extensions (auto-detected via utils/claude_md_detector.py). Use AskUserQuestion.

Category override (-C / --categories)

Default category selection is focus-driven (see table below). Override with -C <list> / --categories <list> (comma-separated, matching commands/brainstorm.md frontmatter):

CategoryCovers
reqrequirements
userstarget users / audience
scopewhat's in / out of scope
techtechnical approach, stack
timelinesequencing, milestones
risksrisks, edge cases, failure modes
existingexisting code/patterns to reuse or replace
successsuccess criteria, how to know it's done
allevery category above (default when -C omitted at deep)

Default categories by focus:

FocusDefault categories
featreq, users, scope, success
archtech, risks, existing, scope
apitech, req, success
uxusers, scope, success
opstech, risks, timeline
(auto/unset)req, users, tech, success

Example: /brainstorm "caching" -C tech,risks limits expert questions to the technical and risk categories regardless of focus.

  1. One follow-up offer. After the questions: "Anything else to add, or ready to generate?" — single yes/no-shaped prompt, not a menu of depth switches.
  2. Generate output. Focus-specific sections (user stories for feat, Mermaid diagram for arch, API endpoints for api, etc.). Save to BRAINSTORM-<topic>-<date>.md.
  3. Spec capture (action=save, or prompted for feat/arch/api). Ask user-story + acceptance criteria, render full SPEC template, write to docs/specs/SPEC-<topic>-<date>.md.
  4. Going-deeper offer (optional, post-spec only) — see below.

Going Deeper: No In-Skill Agent Delegation

This skill does not spawn subagents itself. The pre-redesign version had a "max" depth that launched 1-2 background agents directly from inside brainstorm — duplicating what orchestrator-v2 already does (wave checkpoints, file-based results, explicit model routing, AskUserQuestion confirmation before spawning), but without those safeguards. It also referenced agent type names that didn't exist (backend-architect, product-strategist, etc.), which silently fell back to general-purpose with no model pin — see agents/orchestrator-v2.md BEHAVIOR 2.

Instead: after a spec is captured (Step 7), offer to hand off to the orchestrator via the existing --orch flag / plan-orchestrator skill / /craft:plan <spec-path>. One delegation mechanism, already hardened, instead of two.

Mandatory Interactive Steps

Even when all arguments are provided as flags, the per-depth expert-question count (0/2/6) is never skipped. Skipping silently is a known regression pattern. The depth/focus menu may be skipped when args supply them — the questions themselves may not.

Removed: Per-Invocation Question-Count Override

The pre-redesign version supported colon notation (d:5, m:12, q:0) to override the per-depth expert-question count on a single invocation. This is intentionally not carried forward — the fixed per-depth counts (0/2/6) are part of the same two-decision-point simplification described above ("Going Deeper"); a per-call override reintroduces the kind of escape-hatch menu this redesign removed. If a specific topic genuinely needs more than 6 expert questions, run /brainstorm at deep, then use the "anything else before I generate this?" follow-up offer (Flow step 5) to add more — don't request a count override.

Outputs

  • BRAINSTORM-<topic>-<date>.md (always — even when also saving a spec).
  • docs/specs/SPEC-<topic>-<date>.md (when save action selected).
  • Terminal summary with paths and suggested next command.

Test-Plan Scaffolding (default-on)

When this skill emits a BRAINSTORM or SPEC artifact, it also emits a test-plan scaffold by default. Pass --no-tests to suppress the section.

Tier-inference rule

Infer tiers from the shape of the artifact/change being scoped:

Change shapeTiers to emit
Flag / frontmatter / prose onlye2e + dogfood
+ new parser or script+ unit
+ cross-command data flow+ integration
+ external dependency change+ dependency
+ new command / skill / agent+ count-cascade dogfood

Unselected tiers print as N/A — <reason> (never empty stubs).

Emission rules

  • Emit test stubs red-first (failing placeholder, not passing no-op).
  • Each stub carries # TODO(author): delete if not contract-bearing until the author confirms the contract.
  • Scaffold templates live in ../brainstorm-insights/references/scaffold-templates.md (shared with orchestrate) — point to that file, do not duplicate templates inline.

--yes non-suppression

--yes auto-accepts prompts only; the test-plan and Documentation sections are content and are still emitted under --yes. Only --no-tests / --no-docs remove them.

Documentation Scaffolding (default-on)

When this skill emits a BRAINSTORM or SPEC artifact, it also emits a Documentation section by default. Pass --no-docs to suppress the section.

Which docs to emit

Derive which documentation artifacts are needed by running the existing doc-scorer rubric from skills/orchestration/references/doc-impact-rubric.md (threshold ≥3). Do not invent a new rubric — reuse the scorer as the single source of truth. For each doc type the scorer evaluates (guide, refcard, demo, mermaid), pre-check ([x]) boxes that meet the threshold, mark the rest N/A — score <N>.

Count-cascade exclusion

Auto-docs emission touches only semantic docs — CHANGELOG [Unreleased] mirror, guide/refcard/tutorial prose. It never touches version or count lines; those are excluded and stay in bump-version.sh.

Related Skills

  • brainstorm-insights — friction/goals reporting from session history (was bundled with this skill; now separate, directory name kept for path stability).
  • project-planner — breakdown after a SPEC exists.
  • plan-orchestrator / --orch — multi-agent implementation, post-spec.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.