agentleFS
bostonaholicbostonaholic/rpikit/skills/brainstorming/SKILL.md

brainstorming

Skill19 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

Collaborative design methodology for creative work. Use before research or planning when requirements are unclear, multiple approaches exist, or the idea needs exploration. Refines ideas through progressive questioning.

190 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use chinese-code-review, chinese-commit-conventions 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.
  • Leodorareluctant259Skill

    chinese-code-review

    中文代码审查规范——在保持专业严谨的同时,用符合国内团队文化的方式给出有效反馈

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • Leodorareluctant259Skill

    chinese-commit-conventions

    中文 Git 提交规范 — 适配国内团队的 commit message 规范和 changelog 自动化

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • ryanportfolioSkill

    addskill

    Create, import, update, or install repo or personal skills: runtime ownership, resources, discovery checks.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • ryanportfolioSkill

    apply-firmware

    Bring current folder (plain folder, existing repo, old or partial firmware copy) up to full Harness Firmware in place. Mirror external repo → adopt-repo.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • +2 more from Leodorareluctant259
  • +6 more from ryanportfolio

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

11 rules. 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 170 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 11

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Ask questions one at a time using AskUserQuestion:

    line 43
  2. Distinctive:

    Prefer multiple-choice questions: when possible. Open-ended is fine for exploration, but specific choices accelerate understanding.

    line 67
  3. Distinctive:

    After understanding the idea, present 2-3 approaches:

    line 74
  4. Distinctive:

    Use AskUserQuestion to get user's preference:

    line 98
  5. Distinctive:

    Goal: Document the agreed design.

    line 107
  6. Distinctive:

    After selecting an approach, document it:

    line 109
  7. Distinctive:

    Validate each section: before continuing

    line 112
  8. Distinctive:

    Start broad, narrow based on answers:

    line 146
  9. Distinctive:

    When multiple valid choices exist:

    line 165
  10. Distinctive:

    When requirements are vague:

    line 177
  11. Distinctive:

    After brainstorming, guide to appropriate next step:

    line 203

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 170 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

Brainstorming

Explore ideas collaboratively before committing to an approach.

Purpose

Jumping from vague ideas to implementation wastes effort. This skill provides structured exploration to refine concepts, surface constraints, and evaluate approaches before committing to research or planning. Good brainstorming prevents building the wrong thing.

When to Use

Use brainstorming when:

  • Requirements are vague or incomplete
  • Multiple valid approaches exist
  • The problem space is unfamiliar
  • Trade-offs need explicit discussion
  • Creative design decisions are required

Skip brainstorming when:

  • Requirements are clear and specific
  • The approach is obvious
  • This is a bug fix with known cause
  • This is routine maintenance

The Three Phases

Phase 1: Understanding the Idea

Goal: Clarify what the user wants to accomplish.

Ask questions one at a time using AskUserQuestion:

  1. What problem are you solving?
    • The underlying need, not the proposed solution
    • Why does this matter?
  2. Who is this for?
    • End users, developers, operators?
    • What do they need?
  3. What does success look like?
    • How will you know it works?
    • What would make this valuable?
  4. What constraints exist?
    • Technical limitations
    • Time constraints
    • Compatibility requirements
  5. What have you considered?
    • Initial ideas or preferences
    • Approaches to avoid
    • Prior art to reference

Prefer multiple-choice questions when possible. Open-ended is fine for exploration, but specific choices accelerate understanding.

Phase 2: Exploring Approaches

Goal: Present options with trade-offs.

After understanding the idea, present 2-3 approaches:

## Approach A: [Name]
[2-3 sentences describing the approach]

**Pros**: [Key advantages]
**Cons**: [Key disadvantages]
**Best when**: [Situations where this shines]

## Approach B: [Name]
[2-3 sentences describing the approach]

**Pros**: [Key advantages]
**Cons**: [Key disadvantages]
**Best when**: [Situations where this shines]

## Approach C: [Name] (if applicable)
...

## Recommendation
[Which approach and why, based on stated constraints]

Use AskUserQuestion to get user's preference:

  • "Approach A (recommended)" - with brief rationale
  • "Approach B" - with brief rationale
  • "Explore further" - discuss more options
  • "None of these" - gather more requirements

Phase 3: Design Documentation

Goal: Document the agreed design.

After selecting an approach, document it:

  1. Present design in sections (200-300 words each)
  2. Validate each section before continuing
  3. Adjust based on feedback
  4. Save final design to docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md

Design document structure:

# Design: <Topic> (YYYY-MM-DD)

## Problem Statement
[What problem this solves]

## Chosen Approach
[Selected approach and rationale]

## Design Details
[Specific design decisions]

## Trade-offs Accepted
[What we're giving up and why it's acceptable]

## Open Questions
[Anything still unresolved]

## Next Steps
- [ ] Research phase (if needed)
- [ ] Planning phase
- [ ] Implementation

Questioning Techniques

Funnel Questions

Start broad, narrow based on answers:

1. "What are you trying to build?" (broad)
2. "Which users will interact with this?" (narrowing)
3. "What's the most important interaction?" (specific)

Assumption Surfacing

Make implicit assumptions explicit:

"I'm assuming this needs to integrate with the existing auth system.
Is that correct?"

Trade-off Questions

When multiple valid choices exist:

"There's a trade-off here:
- Option A is simpler but less flexible
- Option B is more flexible but more complex

Which matters more for this use case?"

Examples for Clarity

When requirements are vague:

"Can you give me an example of what you'd expect to happen
when a user does X?"

YAGNI Principle

You Aren't Gonna Need It.

Ruthlessly apply this during brainstorming:

  • Reject features "for later"
  • Question every "nice to have"
  • Focus on the minimum viable solution
  • Complexity can be added later; removing it is hard
User: "We should also add support for X in case we need it"
Response: "Let's focus on the core need first. We can add X
later if it becomes necessary. What's the minimum we need now?"

Transition to Next Phase

After brainstorming, guide to appropriate next step:

If design is complete and validated:

"Design documented at docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md

Ready to proceed?"
- "Start research" → /rpikit:researching-codebase
- "Create implementation plan" → /rpikit:writing-plans
- "Continue brainstorming" → More exploration

If more investigation needed:

"The design needs more context about [topic].

Recommend research phase to investigate before planning."

Integration with RPI Workflow

Brainstorming is an optional pre-phase:

[Brainstorming] → Research → Plan → Implement
     ^
     Optional when requirements unclear

Brainstorming output (design document) feeds into research or planning.

Anti-Patterns

Skipping to Solutions

Wrong: "Let's build X using Y framework" Right: "What problem are we solving? Who is it for?"

Analysis Paralysis

Wrong: Endless exploration without converging Right: Time-box exploration, make decisions

Gold Plating

Wrong: Designing every possible feature Right: YAGNI - minimum viable solution first

Ignoring Constraints

Wrong: Designing without considering limitations Right: Surface constraints early, design within them

Monologue Design

Wrong: Presenting complete design without validation Right: Incremental presentation with checkpoints

Checklist Before Proceeding

  • Problem statement clear
  • Success criteria defined
  • Constraints identified
  • Multiple approaches considered
  • Trade-offs discussed
  • YAGNI applied ruthlessly
  • Design documented (if proceeding to plan)
  • Next phase identified

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.