brainstorming
Skill0 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Shapes a rough idea into an approved written spec before any code, through one-question-at-a-time dialogue — the generalist planning step ux-planner (UI-only) doesn't cover. Use when the user says "let's brainstorm", "help me shape this idea", "I want to plan this before building", "write a spec for", or "/brainstorming".
190 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- DemonDamon/AgenticXtheir own version, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- roundpilot/superpowers-antigravitytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- ainurdev/mystical-assistanttheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- REPOZY/superpowers-optimizedtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- lingyired/status-triotheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- alunadev/ald-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
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.
Leodorareluctant259Skillchinese-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
ryanportfolioSkilladdskill
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
Other versions190 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 190
- obra/superpowers★ 314ksame name
- jnMetaCode/superpowers-zh★ 8.4ksame name
- vudovn/ag-kit★ 8.2ksame name
- vudovn/antigravity-kit★ 8.2ksame name
- JetBrains/thinkrail★ 7.9ksame name
- openai/plugins★ 7.8ksame name
- farm-fe/farm★ 5.6ksame name
- microsoft/FluidFramework★ 4.9ksame name
- BetterTyped/react-zoom-pan-pinch★ 1.9ksame name
- lingyired/status-trio★ 1.8ksame name
180 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository11 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- add-server-actionSkill
- buf-bumpSkill
- e2e-test-fixtureSkill
- frontend-testingSkill
- new-componentSkill
- new-pageSkill
- proto-migrationSkill
- receiving-code-reviewSkill
- systematic-debugSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 170 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 20
Anchor in context: Read the relevant code, rules, and any existing plan or PR before asking anything.
- Distinctive: line 40
Get explicit sign-off, then review-loop: Ask the user to approve. Capture pushback, revise the spec, present again.
- Very specific: line 53
If the idea is UI-shaped specifically, hand the UX/visual portion to ux-planner.
“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.
Files
/brainstorming
Turn a vague idea into a written spec that's been pressure-tested and approved — before writing
code. Planning is the majority of the work on this team; rushing to implementation is where
unexamined assumptions become wasted work. This is the generalist spec-shaping step:
ux-planner covers UI/UX planning only; this covers the whole idea — behavior, data, edges,
boundaries, success criteria.
Gate: no code, no scaffolding, no file changes until the spec is presented and approved. This holds even for "simple" tasks. A single utility, a config tweak, a small form — they all carry assumptions worth surfacing first.
Steps
- Anchor in context. Read the relevant code, rules, and any existing plan or PR before asking anything. Know which app/package, which domain, and what already exists so questions are sharp, not generic.
- Ask clarifying questions one at a time. A single focused question, wait for the answer,
then the next. Drive down each branch of the decision tree before opening another. Cover:
- The actual problem and who it's for (not the proposed solution).
- Inputs, outputs, and the data shapes — including proto/RPC boundaries if any.
- Edge cases, error states, empty/loading/permission-gated states.
- What's explicitly out of scope.
- How you'll know it works (the success criteria).
- Refine iteratively. Feed answers back, name the trade-offs, and offer a concrete default with one escape hatch rather than a menu of equal options. Surface alternatives you considered and why you'd reject them.
- Present the design. A short written spec: problem, approach, data/boundary decisions, edge-case handling, scope cuts, success criteria, and open risks. Concrete enough to build from, brief enough to read.
- Get explicit sign-off, then review-loop. Ask the user to approve. Capture pushback, revise the spec, present again. Iterate until they sign off — don't proceed on a "looks fine."
- Hand off to implementation. Once approved, the spec drives the build. If a
plan-stress-testing skill (e.g.
grill-me) is installed, offer it before building; otherwise proceed to implementation planning directly. Likewise, if an issue-breakdown skill is installed, offer it for splitting the spec into trackable work — this bundle does not ship one.
Notes
- The deliverable is the written spec, even when brief. "I'll just build it" skips the gate.
- If the idea is UI-shaped specifically, hand the UX/visual portion to
ux-planner; keep the behavioral and data spec here.
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
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.