271 lines
11 KiB
Markdown
271 lines
11 KiB
Markdown
---
|
||
name: brainstorming
|
||
description: |
|
||
Socratic design refinement - transforms rough ideas into validated designs through
|
||
structured questioning, alternative exploration, and incremental validation.
|
||
|
||
trigger: |
|
||
- New feature or product idea (requirements unclear)
|
||
- User says "plan", "design", or "architect" something
|
||
- Multiple approaches seem possible
|
||
- Design hasn't been validated by user
|
||
|
||
skip_when: |
|
||
- Design already complete and validated → use writing-plans
|
||
- Have detailed plan ready to execute → use executing-plans
|
||
- Just need task breakdown from existing design → use writing-plans
|
||
|
||
sequence:
|
||
before: [writing-plans, using-git-worktrees]
|
||
|
||
related:
|
||
similar: [writing-plans]
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
# Brainstorming Ideas Into Designs
|
||
|
||
## Overview
|
||
|
||
Transform rough ideas into fully-formed designs through structured questioning and alternative exploration.
|
||
|
||
**Core principle:** Research first, ask targeted questions to fill gaps, explore alternatives, present design incrementally for validation.
|
||
|
||
**Announce at start:** "I'm using the brainstorming skill to refine your idea into a design."
|
||
|
||
## Quick Reference
|
||
|
||
| Phase | Key Activities | Tool Usage | Output |
|
||
|-------|---------------|------------|--------|
|
||
| **Prep: Autonomous Recon** | Inspect repo/docs/commits, form initial model | Native tools (ls, cat, git log, etc.) | Draft understanding to confirm |
|
||
| **1. Understanding** | Share findings, ask only for missing context | AskUserQuestion for real decisions | Purpose, constraints, criteria (confirmed) |
|
||
| **2. Exploration** | Propose 2-3 approaches | AskUserQuestion for approach selection | Architecture options with trade-offs |
|
||
| **3. Design Presentation** | Present in 200-300 word sections | Open-ended questions | Complete design with validation |
|
||
| **4. Design Documentation** | Write design document | writing-clearly-and-concisely skill | Design doc in docs/plans/ |
|
||
| **5. Worktree Setup** | Set up isolated workspace | using-git-worktrees skill | Ready development environment |
|
||
| **6. Planning Handoff** | Create implementation plan | writing-plans skill | Detailed task breakdown |
|
||
|
||
## The Process
|
||
|
||
Copy this checklist to track progress:
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
Brainstorming Progress:
|
||
- [ ] Prep: Autonomous Recon (repo/docs/commits reviewed, initial model shared)
|
||
- [ ] Phase 1: Understanding (purpose, constraints, criteria gathered)
|
||
- [ ] Phase 2: Exploration (2-3 approaches proposed and evaluated)
|
||
- [ ] Phase 3: Design Presentation (design validated in sections)
|
||
- [ ] Phase 4: Design Documentation (design written to docs/plans/)
|
||
- [ ] Phase 5: Worktree Setup (if implementing)
|
||
- [ ] Phase 6: Planning Handoff (if implementing)
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Prep: Autonomous Recon
|
||
|
||
**MANDATORY evidence (paste ALL):**
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
Recon Checklist:
|
||
□ Project structure:
|
||
$ ls -la
|
||
[PASTE OUTPUT]
|
||
|
||
□ Recent activity:
|
||
$ git log --oneline -10
|
||
[PASTE OUTPUT]
|
||
|
||
□ Documentation:
|
||
$ head -50 README.md
|
||
[PASTE OUTPUT]
|
||
|
||
□ Test coverage:
|
||
$ find . -name "*test*" -type f | wc -l
|
||
[PASTE OUTPUT]
|
||
|
||
□ Key frameworks/tools:
|
||
$ [Check package.json, requirements.txt, go.mod, etc.]
|
||
[PASTE RELEVANT SECTIONS]
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
**Only after ALL evidence pasted:** Form your model and share findings.
|
||
|
||
**Skip any evidence = not following the skill**
|
||
|
||
### Question Budget
|
||
|
||
**Maximum 3 questions per phase.** More = insufficient research.
|
||
|
||
Question count:
|
||
- Phase 1: ___/3
|
||
- Phase 2: ___/3
|
||
- Phase 3: ___/3
|
||
|
||
Hit limit? Do research instead of asking.
|
||
|
||
### Phase 1: Understanding
|
||
- Share your synthesized understanding first, then invite corrections or additions.
|
||
- Ask one focused question at a time, only for gaps you cannot close yourself.
|
||
- **Use AskUserQuestion tool** only when you need the human to make a decision among real alternatives.
|
||
- Gather: Purpose, constraints, success criteria (confirmed or amended by your partner)
|
||
|
||
**Example summary + targeted question:**
|
||
```
|
||
Based on the README and yesterday's commit, we're expanding localization to dashboard and billing emails; admin console is still untouched. Only gap I see is whether support responses need localization in this iteration. Did I miss anything important?
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Phase Lock Rules
|
||
|
||
**CRITICAL:** Once you enter a phase, you CANNOT skip ahead.
|
||
|
||
- Asked a question? → WAIT for answer before solutions
|
||
- Proposed approaches? → WAIT for selection before design
|
||
- Started design? → COMPLETE before documentation
|
||
|
||
**Violations:**
|
||
- "While you consider that, here's my design..." → WRONG
|
||
- "I'll proceed with option 1 unless..." → WRONG
|
||
- "Moving forward with the assumption..." → WRONG
|
||
|
||
**WAIT means WAIT. No assumptions.**
|
||
|
||
### Phase 2: Exploration
|
||
- Propose 2-3 different approaches
|
||
- For each: Core architecture, trade-offs, complexity assessment, and your recommendation
|
||
- **Use AskUserQuestion tool** to present approaches when you truly need a judgement call
|
||
- Lead with the option you prefer and explain why; invite disagreement if your partner sees it differently
|
||
- Own prioritization: if the repo makes priorities clear, state them and proceed rather than asking
|
||
|
||
**Example using AskUserQuestion:**
|
||
```
|
||
Question: "Which architectural approach should we use?"
|
||
Options:
|
||
- "Direct API calls with retry logic" (simple, synchronous, easier to debug) ← recommended for current scope
|
||
- "Event-driven with message queue" (scalable, complex setup, eventual consistency)
|
||
- "Hybrid with background jobs" (balanced, moderate complexity, best of both)
|
||
|
||
I recommend the direct API approach because it matches existing patterns and minimizes new infrastructure. Let me know if you see a blocker that pushes us toward the other options.
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Phase 3: Design Presentation
|
||
- Present in coherent sections; use ~200-300 words when introducing new material, shorter summaries once alignment is obvious
|
||
- Cover: Architecture, components, data flow, error handling, testing
|
||
- Check in at natural breakpoints rather than after every paragraph: "Stop me if this diverges from what you expect."
|
||
- Use open-ended questions to allow freeform feedback
|
||
- Assume ownership and proceed unless your partner redirects you
|
||
|
||
**Design Acceptance Gate:**
|
||
|
||
Design is NOT approved until human EXPLICITLY says one of:
|
||
- "Approved" / "Looks good" / "Proceed"
|
||
- "Let's implement that" / "Ship it"
|
||
- "Yes" (in response to "Shall I proceed?")
|
||
|
||
**These do NOT mean approval:**
|
||
- Silence / No response
|
||
- "Interesting" / "I see" / "Hmm"
|
||
- Questions about the design
|
||
- "What about X?" (that's requesting changes)
|
||
|
||
**No explicit approval = keep refining**
|
||
|
||
### Phase 4: Design Documentation
|
||
After validating the design, write it to a permanent document:
|
||
- **File location:** `docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` (use actual date and descriptive topic)
|
||
- **RECOMMENDED SUB-SKILL:** Use elements-of-style:writing-clearly-and-concisely (if available) for documentation quality
|
||
- **Content:** Capture the design as discussed and validated in Phase 3, organized into sections that emerged from the conversation
|
||
- Commit the design document to git before proceeding
|
||
|
||
### Phase 5: Worktree Setup (for implementation)
|
||
When design is approved and implementation will follow:
|
||
- Announce: "I'm using the using-git-worktrees skill to set up an isolated workspace."
|
||
- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use ring-default:using-git-worktrees
|
||
- Follow that skill's process for directory selection, safety verification, and setup
|
||
- Return here when worktree ready
|
||
|
||
### Phase 6: Planning Handoff
|
||
Ask: "Ready to create the implementation plan?"
|
||
|
||
When your human partner confirms (any affirmative response):
|
||
- Announce: "I'm using the writing-plans skill to create the implementation plan."
|
||
- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use ring-default:writing-plans
|
||
- Create detailed plan in the worktree
|
||
|
||
## Question Patterns
|
||
|
||
### When to Use AskUserQuestion Tool
|
||
|
||
**Use AskUserQuestion when:**
|
||
- You need your partner to make a judgement call among real alternatives
|
||
- You have a recommendation and can explain why it’s your preference
|
||
- Prioritization is ambiguous and cannot be inferred from existing materials
|
||
|
||
**Best practices:**
|
||
- State your preferred option and rationale inside the question so your partner can agree or redirect
|
||
- If you know the answer from repo/docs, state it as fact and proceed—no question needed
|
||
- When priorities are spelled out, acknowledge them and proceed rather than delegating the choice back to your partner
|
||
|
||
### When to Use Open-Ended Questions
|
||
|
||
**Use open-ended questions for:**
|
||
- Phase 3: Design validation ("Does this look right so far?")
|
||
- When you need detailed feedback or explanation
|
||
- When partner should describe their own requirements
|
||
- When structured options would limit creative input
|
||
|
||
Frame them to confirm or expand your current understanding rather than reopening settled topics.
|
||
|
||
**Example decision flow:**
|
||
- "What authentication method?" → Use AskUserQuestion (2-4 options)
|
||
- "Does this design handle your use case?" → Open-ended (validation)
|
||
|
||
## When to Revisit Earlier Phases
|
||
|
||
```dot
|
||
digraph revisit_phases {
|
||
rankdir=LR;
|
||
"New constraint revealed?" [shape=diamond];
|
||
"Partner questions approach?" [shape=diamond];
|
||
"Requirements unclear?" [shape=diamond];
|
||
"Return to Phase 1" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ffcccc"];
|
||
"Return to Phase 2" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ffffcc"];
|
||
"Continue forward" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ccffcc"];
|
||
|
||
"New constraint revealed?" -> "Return to Phase 1" [label="yes"];
|
||
"New constraint revealed?" -> "Partner questions approach?" [label="no"];
|
||
"Partner questions approach?" -> "Return to Phase 2" [label="yes"];
|
||
"Partner questions approach?" -> "Requirements unclear?" [label="no"];
|
||
"Requirements unclear?" -> "Return to Phase 1" [label="yes"];
|
||
"Requirements unclear?" -> "Continue forward" [label="no"];
|
||
}
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
**You can and should go backward when:**
|
||
- Partner reveals new constraint during Phase 2 or 3 → Return to Phase 1
|
||
- Validation shows fundamental gap in requirements → Return to Phase 1
|
||
- Partner questions approach during Phase 3 → Return to Phase 2
|
||
- Something doesn't make sense → Go back and clarify
|
||
|
||
**Avoid forcing forward linearly** when going backward would give better results.
|
||
|
||
## Required Patterns
|
||
|
||
This skill uses these universal patterns:
|
||
- **State Tracking:** See `skills/shared-patterns/state-tracking.md`
|
||
- **Failure Recovery:** See `skills/shared-patterns/failure-recovery.md`
|
||
- **Exit Criteria:** See `skills/shared-patterns/exit-criteria.md`
|
||
- **TodoWrite:** See `skills/shared-patterns/todowrite-integration.md`
|
||
|
||
Apply ALL patterns when using this skill.
|
||
|
||
## Key Principles
|
||
|
||
| Principle | Application |
|
||
|-----------|-------------|
|
||
| **One question at a time** | Phase 1: Single targeted question only for gaps you can’t close yourself |
|
||
| **Structured choices** | Use AskUserQuestion tool for 2-4 options with trade-offs |
|
||
| **YAGNI ruthlessly** | Remove unnecessary features from all designs |
|
||
| **Explore alternatives** | Always propose 2-3 approaches before settling |
|
||
| **Incremental validation** | Present design in sections, validate each |
|
||
| **Flexible progression** | Go backward when needed - flexibility > rigidity |
|
||
| **Own the initiative** | Recommend priorities and next steps; ask if you should proceed only when requirements conflict |
|
||
| **Announce usage** | State skill usage at start of session |
|