agentleFS
JunfengRanJunfengRan/dev-env/skills/brainstorm/SKILL.md

brainstorm

Skill1 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

启发式创意澄清:在实现或深度研究前,通过对话细化意图、约束与方案取舍。 触发:新功能/架构构思、需求模糊、方案取舍、用户说 brainstorm/头脑风暴/先设计再写。 非硬门禁——用户已有明确计划或改动显然琐碎时可跳过。

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

Files
SKILL.md

Brainstorm(启发式,非流水线)

把模糊想法变成可评审的短设计。本 skill 不进入 spec/research-workflow.yaml,也不阻断 gate / reducer。

何时用 / 何时跳过

建议使用可以跳过
新功能、新模块、行为变更且意图未对齐用户已给出可执行 plan / US
多方案取舍未定单行修复、文案、显然琐碎的改动
即将写 architecture / selection 文档用户明确说「直接做,别 brainstorm」
deep-research 的 brief 前研究问题仍糊证据目标与读者已写清

默认姿态:建议 → 征求同意 → 再展开。不要未经提示就开长篇 brainstorm。

融合原则(来源)

理念来源在本 skill 中的形态
一次一问、多选优先Superpowers brainstorming澄清阶段默认一次一问
2–3 方案 + 推荐Superpowers探索阶段必给取舍与推荐
分段呈现设计、增量确认Superpowers按复杂度缩放段落
YAGNI / 范围过大先拆Superpowers多子系统先分解再 brainstorm 第一块
现有代码优先、边界清晰Superpowers先读仓再提案;单位职责单一
方案取舍表 + metadatawrite-idea-docs落盘时用设计文档习惯
证据意识deep-research / interpret-tech-notes涉及实现断言时标「待验证」
Spec 自检Superpowers self-review落盘后扫 TBD/矛盾/歧义

轻量流程(可中途退出)

0. 征得同意(一句)→ 1. 扫项目上下文 → 2. 澄清(一次一问)
→ 3. 2–3 方案取舍 → 4. 短设计确认 → 5. 可选落盘 → 6. 交接下一 skill

任一步用户说「够了 / 直接做」→ 立即结束 brainstorm,进入实现或 research。

Step 0:征得同意

示例:

这块看起来还没对齐意图/方案。要不要先快速 brainstorm(几轮澄清 + 方案对比)?也可以直接做。

Step 1:项目上下文

  • 读相关文件、docs、近期结构;跟随现有模式
  • 请求过大(多个独立子系统)→ 先拆分,再对第一块 brainstorm
  • 不跑无关重构

Step 2:澄清

  • 一次一问;能多选就多选
  • 聚焦:目的、约束、成功标准、非目标
  • 不要一次抛出问卷

Step 3:方案取舍

  • 给出 2–3 个可行路径
  • 每项:要点、代价、适用场景
  • 先写推荐项 + 理由(不要假中立堆砌)

Step 4:短设计

按复杂度缩放:琐碎几句;复杂则分节(架构 / 组件 / 数据流 / 错误与测试),每节可问「这样可以吗」。

设计时检查:

  • 单元是否单一职责、接口是否清晰
  • 能否在不读内部的情况下理解用途
  • 是否违反 YAGNI

Step 5:可选落盘

用户需要可追溯文档时写入:

  • 产品/架构向:docs/design/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-brainstorm.md(或交给 write-idea-docs 升格为 *-architecture.md)
  • 研究向:把结论摘要并入 .research/<run-id>/artifacts/research-brief.json 的 scope / evidenceTargets 草稿

落盘后快速自检:无 TBD、无自相矛盾、范围可执行、歧义已拍板。

Step 6:交接(非强制链)

下一意图交接
写实现计划用户确认后进入 .cursor/plans/ 或写作计划流程
写设计文档write-idea-docs
深度研究/选型deep-research(从 brief 起;brainstorm 不占 Spec state)
直接编码回到 dev-workflow 快速路径

不要把 brainstorm 当成必须接到 writing-plans / deep-research 的硬终端态。

与硬流水线的边界

  • 不新增 Spec state、gate、reducer 事件
  • 不在 stop hook 里强制跑 brainstorm
  • 不因「太简单」以外的原因默认拦截所有编码(与 Superpowers HARD-GATE 不同:此处为启发式)
  • Visual companion / 浏览器 mockup:可选;无本地 companion 服务时用 Mermaid / 文字对比即可(draw-mermaid-diagrams)

产出检查(若落盘)

见 references/heuristic-checklist.md。

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.