brainstorming
Skill6 starsChanged 4 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Use when starting any creative work — creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior — before any implementation begins.
190 other projects use a version of this, 103 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- DemonDamon/AgenticXedited, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- roundpilot/superpowers-antigravitytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- ainurdev/mystical-assistantedited, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- REPOZY/superpowers-optimizededited, 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 versions190 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 103
- openai/plugins★ 7.8k17% same
- farm-fe/farm★ 5.6k35% same
- BetterTyped/react-zoom-pan-pinch★ 1.9k35% same
- revokslab/ShipFree★ 1.7k49% same
- pcvelz/superpowers★ 1.3k13% same
- DemonDamon/AgenticX★ 1k49% same
- coco-research/coco★ 79732% same
- AgentTeam-TaichuAI/ScienceClaw★ 67132% same
- shobcoder/shob★ 57531% same
- lnikell/loopndroll★ 56735% same
93 more not listed
Wrote their own version · 87
- 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
- microsoft/FluidFramework★ 4.9ksame name
- lingyired/status-trio★ 1.8ksame name
- feiskyer/claude-code-settings★ 1.7ksame name
- GanyuanRan/Aegis★ 1.4ksame name
- sentient-agi/EvoSkill★ 1.2ksame name
77 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 repository116 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/graphify/references/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agent-config-security-auditSkill
- agent-harness-designSkill
- agent-readable-docsSkill
- agent-runtime-patternsSkill
- agent-session-forensicsSkill
- ai-regression-testingSkill
- ai-slop-cleanerSkill
- api-doc-reviewSkill
- architecture-decision-recordsSkill
- architecture-simplificationSkill
- ask-claudeSkill
- ask-codexSkill
- ask-geminiSkill
- autonomous-delivery-pipelineSkill
- baseline-comparison-reviewSkill
- bigquery-cost-auditSkill
- browser-automation-safetySkill
- bug-huntSkill
- build-fix-minimal-diffSkill
- canonical-advisor-routingSkill
- change-impact-checkSkill
- changelog-generatorSkill
- ci-failure-readoutSkill
- codebase-migration-batchesSkill
- context-compressionSkill
- context-docsSkill
- context-minimizationSkill
- context-retrieval-loopSkill
- data-qualitySkill
- dataset-split-reviewSkill
- dbt-incremental-strategy-auditSkill
- dbt-preflightSkill
- dbt-strategySkill
- dead-code-removalSkill
- defuddleSkill
- dependency-cleanupSkill
- deploy-pipeline-runbookSkill
- dispatching-parallel-agentsSkill
- doc-consistency-checkSkill
- environment-doctorSkill
- experiment-tracking-reviewSkill
- failure-triageSkill
- filesystem-mcp-guardrailsSkill
- finishing-a-development-branchSkill
- flaky-test-investigationSkill
- gh-address-commentsSkill
- github-ci-failure-triageSkill
- graphifySkill
- handoff-disciplineSkill
- hard-won-skill-extractorSkill
- hook-safety-reviewSkill
- incident-readoutSkill
- incremental-migrationSkill
- json-canvasSkill
- local-rag-mcpSkill
- log-driven-diagnosisSkill
- managed-codebase-contextSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
17 rules. 0 are common, 16 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 170 edited versions we read keep these.
16
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 10
Start by understanding the current project context, then ask questions one at a time to refine the idea.
- Distinctive: line 13
Do NOT invoke any implementation skill, write any code, scaffold any project, or take any implementation action until you have presented a …
- Distinctive: line 59
The terminal state is invoking writing-plans: Do NOT invoke any other implementation skill directly.
- Distinctive: line 65
Check out the current project state first (files, docs, recent commits)
- Distinctive: line 66
Before asking detailed questions, assess scope: if the request describes multiple independent subsystems, flag this immediately
- Distinctive: line 67
If the project is too large for a single spec, help the user decompose into sub-projects
- Distinctive: line 69
Only one question per message — if a topic needs more exploration, break it into multiple questions
- Distinctive: line 81
Ask after each section whether it looks right so far
- Very specific: line 94
Write the validated design to docs/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md
- Distinctive: line 95
Commit the design document to git
- Distinctive: line 98
After writing the spec document, look at it with fresh eyes:
- Distinctive: line 101
Internal consistency: Do any sections contradict each other?
- Distinctive: line 106
After the spec review passes, ask the user to review the written spec before proceeding:
- Distinctive: line 110
Wait for the user's response.
- Distinctive: line 118
One question at a time: - Don't overwhelm with multiple questions
- Distinctive: line 120
YAGNI ruthlessly: - Remove unnecessary features from all designs
- Distinctive: line 121
Explore alternatives: - Always propose 2-3 approaches before settling
“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 Ideas Into Designs
Help turn ideas into fully formed designs and specs through natural collaborative dialogue.
Start by understanding the current project context, then ask questions one at a time to refine the idea. Once you understand what you're building, present the design and get user approval.
<HARD-GATE>
Do NOT invoke any implementation skill, write any code, scaffold any project, or take any implementation action until you have presented a design and the user has approved it. This applies to EVERY project regardless of perceived simplicity.
</HARD-GATE>Anti-Pattern: "This Is Too Simple To Need A Design"
Every project goes through this process. A todo list, a single-function utility, a config change — all of them. "Simple" projects are where unexamined assumptions cause the most wasted work. The design can be short (a few sentences for truly simple projects), but you MUST present it and get approval.
Checklist
You MUST create a task for each of these items and complete them in order:
- Explore project context — check files, docs, recent commits
- Ask clarifying questions — one at a time, understand purpose/constraints/success criteria
- Propose 2-3 approaches — with trade-offs and your recommendation
- Present design — in sections scaled to their complexity, get user approval after each section
- Write design doc — save to
docs/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.mdand commit - Spec self-review — quick inline check for placeholders, contradictions, ambiguity, scope
- User reviews written spec — ask user to review the spec file before proceeding
- Transition to implementation — invoke writing-plans skill to create implementation plan
Process Flow
graph TD
Explore["Explore project context"]
Ask["Ask clarifying questions"]
Propose["Propose 2-3 approaches"]
Present["Present design sections"]
ApproveDesign{"User approves design?"}
WriteDoc["Write design doc"]
SpecReview["Spec self-review<br/>(fix inline)"]
ReviewSpec{"User reviews spec?"}
InvokePlans((("Invoke writing-plans skill")))
Explore --> Ask
Ask --> Propose
Propose --> Present
Present --> ApproveDesign
ApproveDesign -->|"no, revise"| Present
ApproveDesign -->|"yes"| WriteDoc
WriteDoc --> SpecReview
SpecReview --> ReviewSpec
ReviewSpec -->|"changes requested"| WriteDoc
ReviewSpec -->|"approved"| InvokePlansThe terminal state is invoking writing-plans. Do NOT invoke any other implementation skill directly. The ONLY skill you invoke after brainstorming is writing-plans.
The Process
Understanding the idea:
- Check out the current project state first (files, docs, recent commits)
- Before asking detailed questions, assess scope: if the request describes multiple independent subsystems, flag this immediately
- If the project is too large for a single spec, help the user decompose into sub-projects
- For appropriately-scoped projects, ask questions one at a time to refine the idea
- Only one question per message — if a topic needs more exploration, break it into multiple questions
- Focus on understanding: purpose, constraints, success criteria
Exploring approaches:
- Propose 2-3 different approaches with trade-offs
- Lead with your recommended option and explain why
Presenting the design:
- Once you understand what you're building, present the design
- Scale each section to its complexity: a few sentences if straightforward, up to 200-300 words if nuanced
- Ask after each section whether it looks right so far
- Cover: architecture, components, data flow, error handling, testing
Design for isolation and clarity:
- Break the system into smaller units that each have one clear purpose
- For each unit: what does it do, how do you use it, what does it depend on?
- Smaller, well-bounded units are easier to test and change
After the Design
Documentation:
- Write the validated design to
docs/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md - Commit the design document to git
Spec Self-Review: After writing the spec document, look at it with fresh eyes:
- Placeholder scan: Any "TBD", "TODO", incomplete sections? Fix them.
- Internal consistency: Do any sections contradict each other?
- Scope check: Is this focused enough for a single implementation plan?
- Ambiguity check: Could any requirement be interpreted two different ways?
User Review Gate: After the spec review passes, ask the user to review the written spec before proceeding:
"Spec written and committed to
<path>. Please review it and let me know if you want to make any changes before we start writing out the implementation plan."
Wait for the user's response. Only proceed once the user approves.
Implementation:
- Invoke the writing-plans skill to create a detailed implementation plan
Key Principles
- One question at a time - Don't overwhelm with multiple questions
- Multiple choice preferred - Easier to answer than open-ended when possible
- YAGNI ruthlessly - Remove unnecessary features from all designs
- Explore alternatives - Always propose 2-3 approaches before settling
- Incremental validation - Present design, get approval before moving on
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.

