brainstorming
Skill7 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
This skill should be used before implementing features, building components, or making changes. It guides exploring user intent, approaches, and design decisions before planning. Triggers on "let's brainstorm", "help me think through", "what should we build", "explore approaches", ambiguous feature requests, or when the user's request has multiple valid interpretations that need clarification.
191 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
Leodorareluctant259Skillchinese-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
ryanportfolioSkillapply-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 versions191 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- CodeWithBehnam/cc-docs★ 2100% same
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 repository25 other files it gives its agents.
- .github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- enlightenSkill
- ce-brainstormSkill
- ce-compound-refreshSkill
- ce-compoundSkill
- ce-ideateSkill
- ce-planSkill
- ce-reviewSkill
- ce-workSkill
- claude-permissions-optimizerSkill
- deepen-planSkill
- document-reviewSkill
- evolveSkill
- feature-videoSkill
- instinctsSkill
- karpathy-guidelinesSkill
- learnSkill
- lfgSkill
- observeSkill
- ralph-loopSkill
- resolve_todo_parallelSkill
- setupSkill
- slfgSkill
- test-browserSkill
- unslopSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 170 edited versions we read keep these.
7
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 28
Before diving into questions, assess whether brainstorming is needed.
- Distinctive: line 42
If requirements are clear, suggest: "Your requirements seem clear.
- Distinctive: line 46
Ask questions one at a time to understand the user's intent.
- Distinctive: line 52
Avoid: "How should users be notified?"
- Distinctive: line 80
After understanding the idea, propose 2-3 concrete approaches.
- Distinctive: line 103
Consider YAGNI—simpler is usually better
- Distinctive: line 159
Keep sections short—200-300 words maximum.
- Very specific: line 190
When brainstorm output exists, /ce:plan should detect it and use it as input, skipping its own idea refinement phase.
“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
This skill provides detailed process knowledge for effective brainstorming sessions that clarify WHAT to build before diving into HOW to build it.
When to Use This Skill
Brainstorming is valuable when:
- Requirements are unclear or ambiguous
- Multiple approaches could solve the problem
- Trade-offs need to be explored with the user
- The user hasn't fully articulated what they want
- The feature scope needs refinement
Brainstorming can be skipped when:
- Requirements are explicit and detailed
- The user knows exactly what they want
- The task is a straightforward bug fix or well-defined change
Core Process
Phase 0: Assess Requirement Clarity
Before diving into questions, assess whether brainstorming is needed.
Signals that requirements are clear:
- User provided specific acceptance criteria
- User referenced existing patterns to follow
- User described exact behavior expected
- Scope is constrained and well-defined
Signals that brainstorming is needed:
- User used vague terms ("make it better", "add something like")
- Multiple reasonable interpretations exist
- Trade-offs haven't been discussed
- User seems unsure about the approach
If requirements are clear, suggest: "Your requirements seem clear. Consider proceeding directly to planning or implementation."
Phase 1: Understand the Idea
Ask questions one at a time to understand the user's intent. Avoid overwhelming with multiple questions.
Question Techniques:
- Prefer multiple choice when natural options exist
- Good: "Should the notification be: (a) email only, (b) in-app only, or (c) both?"
- Avoid: "How should users be notified?"
- Start broad, then narrow
- First: What is the core purpose?
- Then: Who are the users?
- Finally: What constraints exist?
- Validate assumptions explicitly
- "I'm assuming users will be logged in. Is that correct?"
- Ask about success criteria early
- "How will you know this feature is working well?"
Key Topics to Explore:
| Topic | Example Questions |
| Purpose | What problem does this solve? What's the motivation? |
| Users | Who uses this? What's their context? |
| Constraints | Any technical limitations? Timeline? Dependencies? |
| Success | How will you measure success? What's the happy path? |
| Edge Cases | What shouldn't happen? Any error states to consider? |
| Existing Patterns | Are there similar features in the codebase to follow? |
Exit Condition: Continue until the idea is clear OR user says "proceed" or "let's move on"
Phase 2: Explore Approaches
After understanding the idea, propose 2-3 concrete approaches.
Structure for Each Approach:
### Approach A: [Name]
[2-3 sentence description]
**Pros:**
- [Benefit 1]
- [Benefit 2]
**Cons:**
- [Drawback 1]
- [Drawback 2]
**Best when:** [Circumstances where this approach shines]Guidelines:
- Lead with a recommendation and explain why
- Be honest about trade-offs
- Consider YAGNI—simpler is usually better
- Reference codebase patterns when relevant
Phase 3: Capture the Design
Summarize key decisions in a structured format.
Design Doc Structure:
---
date: YYYY-MM-DD
topic: <kebab-case-topic>
---
# <Topic Title>
## What We're Building
[Concise description—1-2 paragraphs max]
## Why This Approach
[Brief explanation of approaches considered and why this one was chosen]
## Key Decisions
- [Decision 1]: [Rationale]
- [Decision 2]: [Rationale]
## Open Questions
- [Any unresolved questions for the planning phase]
## Next Steps
→ `/ce:plan` for implementation detailsOutput Location: docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-brainstorm.md
Phase 4: Handoff
Present clear options for what to do next:
- Proceed to planning → Run
/ce:plan - Refine further → Continue exploring the design
- Done for now → User will return later
YAGNI Principles
During brainstorming, actively resist complexity:
- Don't design for hypothetical future requirements
- Choose the simplest approach that solves the stated problem
- Prefer boring, proven patterns over clever solutions
- Ask "Do we really need this?" when complexity emerges
- Defer decisions that don't need to be made now
Incremental Validation
Keep sections short—200-300 words maximum. After each section of output, pause to validate understanding:
- "Does this match what you had in mind?"
- "Any adjustments before we continue?"
- "Is this the direction you want to go?"
This prevents wasted effort on misaligned designs.
Anti-Patterns to Avoid
| Anti-Pattern | Better Approach |
| Asking 5 questions at once | Ask one at a time |
| Jumping to implementation details | Stay focused on WHAT, not HOW |
| Proposing overly complex solutions | Start simple, add complexity only if needed |
| Ignoring existing codebase patterns | Research what exists first |
| Making assumptions without validating | State assumptions explicitly and confirm |
| Creating lengthy design documents | Keep it concise—details go in the plan |
Integration with Planning
Brainstorming answers WHAT to build:
- Requirements and acceptance criteria
- Chosen approach and rationale
- Key decisions and trade-offs
Planning answers HOW to build it:
- Implementation steps and file changes
- Technical details and code patterns
- Testing strategy and verification
When brainstorm output exists, /ce:plan should detect it and use it as input, skipping its own idea refinement phase.
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.

