Menu
Produce 3 thin comparable variants of a proposed design with a comparison artifact and mandatory Human Validation Plan
Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
Based on SOC occupation classification
Use when executing implementation plans with 3+ independent, file-disjoint tasks that benefit from parallel specialist agents with shared contracts and reviewer-gated completion
Use when verifying an implementation still matches its spec or plan — during REVIEW or SHIP, or on demand to check drift, confirm you are still on plan, or run a spec check — surfacing spec deviations, unvalidated assumptions, and untested code paths against Intent Truth
Use when mining the repo for improvement proposals in the LEARN phase — manually sweeping eval baselines, gate-status output, memory feedback, and parked revival criteria into a ranked, evidence-graded proposal report with in-session approve/reject and a GitHub-issue queue
Use when you need to run the repo's own declared test/lint/type gate locally and emit pass/fail evidence — during REVIEW, before requesting code review, or on a request to run the tests or verify the build — discovering the gate from CLAUDE.md, Makefile, pyproject, or .verify.yml
Use when you need to prove a change actually works through its real interfaces — during REVIEW or on requests like validate the feature, does it work, run e2e, or smoke test — covering browser E2E, API smoke, CLI checks, and a11y, perf (Lighthouse), and visual-regression audits with graceful tool-degradation
Use when starting a new feature or initiative and you need problem context, prior art, and acceptance criteria before design — the DISCOVER phase entry point — pulling Jira/Confluence context and synthesizing a discovery brief to validate problem framing
| name | prototype-lab |
| description | Produce 3 thin comparable variants of a proposed design with a comparison artifact and mandatory Human Validation Plan |
Build exactly 3 thin, comparable variants of a proposed design so the user can evaluate concrete alternatives before committing to a direction.
During DESIGN phase when competing approaches are identified. Fires on trigger match alongside brainstorming (which remains the process driver). The user or DESIGN phase guidance may suggest prototyping; this skill does not depend on brainstorming internally escalating to it.
Relationship to design-debate:
Determine what "a variant" means for this project:
| Project type | Variant contents |
|---|---|
| New skill | SKILL.md draft + routing entry + one behavioral test |
| New hook | Script draft + config entry + one syntax test |
| New feature | Implementation sketch + one test |
| Architecture decision | Thin proof-of-concept code + one integration test |
Default: 3 variants. User can override ("just compare these 2").
For each variant (A, B, C):
Save to docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-prototype-lab.md:
# Prototype Comparison: <Topic>
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Variants:** 3
## Variant A: <Name>
**Approach:** <1-2 sentences>
**Trade-offs:** <pros and cons>
**Artifact:** <path or inline>
## Variant B: <Name>
**Approach:** <1-2 sentences>
**Trade-offs:** <pros and cons>
**Artifact:** <path or inline>
## Variant C: <Name>
**Approach:** <1-2 sentences>
**Trade-offs:** <pros and cons>
**Artifact:** <path or inline>
## Recommendation
**Chosen:** Variant <X>
**Reasoning:** <why this over the others>
## Human Validation Plan
<REQUIRED — how the user will test the chosen option with real usage>
<AI-simulated testing may inform the draft but never replaces this section>
<Describe: who tests, what they test, what success looks like>
## Success Signals
<What to measure after shipping to confirm the choice was right>
Show the comparison artifact. Ask the user to choose a variant. Only the chosen variant proceeds to writing-plans. The others are archived in the comparison artifact.