| name | ccdawn-creative-toolbox |
| description | Use when the user wants context-aware concept collision, unknown concept generation, divergent thinking, creative ideation, concept invention, paradigm exploration, unusual alternatives, product ideas, research concepts, strategy concepts, story concepts, or surprising but useful options. |
| license | MIT |
Creative Toolbox
Goal
Use current context to generate genuinely new, nameable concepts instead of ordinary suggestion lists.
This skill should reduce creative noise: extract the useful tension, run a small set of high-yield operators, then return concept cards that can be judged, tested, or routed into planning.
Default behavior
- Do not turn every creative request into a long ritual.
- Do not ask whether to enable role collision by default.
- Default
Collision Forum is skipped.
- Enable
Collision Forum only when the user explicitly asks for it, the creative quality clearly depends on multi-role debate, or BRT routes the request as deep co-creation.
- Use 3-5 operators, not the whole toolbox.
- Every final new concept must have a name, a mechanism, a source collision, and a next experiment.
Minimal flow
- Identify the creative target: product idea, research direction, naming, story/world concept, strategy, interface, or problem reframing.
- Extract context materials: concept atoms, hidden tensions, evidence gaps, abnormal signals, unnamed needs, and hard boundaries.
- Choose 3-5 operators:
- required:
Context Collision
- required for new concepts/names:
Naming Forge
- at least one distant analogy or cross-domain mechanism
- at least one assumption breaker, reversal, extreme constraint, or contradiction solver
- Generate unnamed concept embryos before naming or judging.
- Name and refine the strongest embryos.
- Evaluate with 2-4 relevant perspectives; use top-talent role cards only when the task needs strong adversarial judgment.
- Return 3-7 concept cards plus one recommended next step.
Load references/full-toolbox.md only when the user asks for a full creative run, needs detailed operator rules, wants Collision Forum, or the short flow is not enough.
Load references/role-deck.md only when running Perspective Jury with top-talent role cards.
Operator menu
| Operator | Use when | Output |
|---|
| Context Collision | Always | Source materials plus new mechanism |
| Naming Forge | Naming or new concepts | Main name, alternatives, rejected names |
| Assumption Breaker | Brief is conventional | Reversed assumptions and opportunities |
| Cross-Domain Analogy | Need fresh structure | Borrowed mechanism, not surface style |
| Extreme Constraint | Need sharper ideas | Designs that survive a hard limit |
| Concept Fusion | Two ideas can combine | Third concept with a new mechanism |
| Mutation | Existing idea is close | Variants with changed user, scale, medium, or interaction |
| Contradiction Solver | Goals conflict | Layered or staged resolution |
| Novelty Filter | Output feels generic | Removed obvious ideas and survivors |
| Perspective Jury | Need self-review | Challenge, evidence, verdict |
| Collision Forum | User wants debate | Short multi-role exchange and second-generation ideas |
Concept quality gate
A concept is eligible only when it:
- comes from at least two current context materials;
- changes a mechanism or relationship, not just wording;
- names something the user could not previously discuss clearly;
- can generate a follow-up function, experiment, story beat, metric, or decision;
- survives a usefulness check and at least one skeptical challenge.
Downgrade it to a normal idea if it is only an existing feature with a prettier name.
Compact output
创意调用:
- Target: ...
- Operators: ...
- Collision Forum: skipped / enabled, because ...
- Context Materials: ...
概念胚胎:
| Embryo | Source Collision | New Mechanism | Why It Is Not Generic |
新概念卡:
| Name | Definition | Source Collision | Mechanism | Newness | Next Experiment |
筛选:
- Safe:
- Sharp:
- Strange:
- Recommended:
Review:
- Challenge:
- Evidence:
- Verdict:
Route Out:
- <从 BRT interface 的 Route Out 选择一个>
Use the full output contract in references/full-toolbox.md only for deep creative sessions.
BRT interface
- Context Boundary: user brief, current conversation context, extracted concept materials, and any explicit domain constraints.
- Output Contract: named concept cards, quality gate result, recommendation, and next route.
- Allowed Action: generate and evaluate concepts only; implementation, external research, asset creation, or code changes require routing to the proper owner.
- Success Evidence: each concept has source collision, mechanism, name, novelty reason, and testable next experiment.
- Stop Condition: creative target unclear, insufficient context materials, user asks to converge into implementation, or safety/ownership constraints block the concept.
- Route Out:
ccdawn-planning, ccdawn-feature-reuse-research, ccdawn-evaluation, or back to ccdawn-brt for alignment.
统一调用契约
- 只处理 BRT interface 范围;不匹配时回
ccdawn-brt 或更具体 owner,复合任务不吞其他 owner。
- 用户可见内容默认中文,完成只报状态、产出、证据和剩余风险;代码、命令、路径、错误原文、API/协议、skill 名和枚举保留原样;Route Out 仅以 BRT interface 为准,末行写
下一步建议: <一个具体动作>。
Common mistakes
- Asking for permission to run a long debate when a compact creative answer would help more.
- Producing a list of reasonable suggestions without new mechanisms.
- Naming too early and letting the name hide a weak concept.
- Using generic roles such as "user" and "engineer" when the task needs sharp expert evaluation.
- Keeping all weird ideas or deleting all weird ideas; filter by mechanism and testability.