Menu
The review-first prompt is selected by default. You can switch to a direct command or download a local copy.
Read SKILL.md and any companion files shown by SkillsMP before deciding whether to install.
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.
A direct command skips the review prompt. Inspect the source before running it.
npx skills add https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry --skill brainstormThe command stays on one line. Scroll horizontally to inspect it before copying.
Prefer a local copy? Download the files currently available to SkillsMP.
Showing SKILL.md
Based on SOC occupation classification
| name | brainstorm |
| description | Separate goals from implementation. |
| practices | ["lean-startup","mythical-man-month"] |
| hexagonal_role | domain |
| consumes | ["standards"] |
| produces | ["result.json","verdict.json"] |
| context_rel | [{"kind":"shared-kernel","with":"standards"}] |
| skill_api_version | 1 |
| metadata | {"tier":"execution","dependencies":[]} |
| context | {"window":"inherit","intent":{"mode":"none"},"sections":{"exclude":["INTEL","HISTORY","TASK"]},"intel_scope":"none"} |
| output_contract | skills/research/schemas/findings.json |
Purpose: Separate WHAT from HOW. Explore the problem space before committing to a solution.
Upstream of move 1 (shape intent as BDD) of the operating loop. Consumes a free-text goal; produces Given/When/Then-shaped acceptance examples that /discovery can fold into a BDD intent issue. The Capture step (phase 4 below) is not complete until at least one happy path and one critical edge are written as testable Gherkin — "it should work" is not a captured example.
Four phases:
/plan/brainstorm "add user authentication" # full 4-phase process
/brainstorm # prompts for goal
If the user provided a goal string, evaluate it. Otherwise prompt for one.
Use AskUserQuestion with options to gauge clarity:
If vague or exploring, ask follow-up questions to sharpen the goal before proceeding. Do NOT move to Phase 2 until you have a concrete problem statement (one sentence, testable).
Answer these questions (use codebase exploration as needed):
Summarize findings before moving on. If anything is unclear, ask the user.
Generate 2-3 distinct approaches. For each:
Before asking the user to choose, stress-test each approach:
For each approach, answer these red team questions (read references/red-team-checklist.md):
Mark any approach that fails 2+ red team questions as HIGH RISK in the comparison.
If all approaches fail 2+ questions, generate a 4th "hybrid" approach addressing the weaknesses.
Present the comparison and use AskUserQuestion to let the user pick an approach or request a hybrid.
Generate a date slug: YYYY-MM-DD-<goal-slug> (lowercase, hyphens, no spaces).
Write the output file to .agents/brainstorm/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md:
---
id: brainstorm-YYYY-MM-DD-<goal-slug>
type: brainstorm
date: YYYY-MM-DD
---
# Brainstorm: <Goal>
## Problem Statement
## Approaches Considered
## Selected Approach
## Open Questions
## Next Step: /plan
All five sections must be populated. The "Next Step" section should contain a concrete /plan invocation suggestion with the selected approach as context.
Create the .agents/brainstorm/ directory if it does not exist.
Phase 4 output written = done. No further phases, no loops.
After writing the output file, verify:
Problem Statement, Approaches Considered, Selected Approach, Open Questions, Next Step: /plan) are present and non-emptyReport the file path to the user.
Example 1: Specific goal
User: /brainstorm "add rate limiting to the API"
Phase 1: Goal is clear — add rate limiting to the API.
Phase 2: Problem is uncontrolled request volume causing timeouts.
Benefits operators and end users. No rate limiting exists today.
Phase 3: Three approaches — token bucket middleware, API gateway,
per-route decorators. User picks token bucket.
Phase 4: Writes .agents/brainstorm/2026-02-17-rate-limiting.md
Example 2: Vague goal
User: /brainstorm "improve performance"
Phase 1: Goal is vague. Asks: "Which part? API response times,
build speed, database queries, or something else?"
User says: "API response times on the search endpoint."
Phase 2: Investigates search endpoint, finds N+1 queries.
Phase 3: Approaches — query optimization, caching layer, pagination.
Phase 4: Writes .agents/brainstorm/2026-02-17-search-performance.md
| Problem | Cause | Solution |
|---|---|---|
| Brainstorm loops in Phase 1 without advancing | Goal remains too vague after follow-up questions | Provide a concrete, testable problem statement (e.g., "reduce API search latency below 200ms" instead of "improve performance"). |
| Output file missing one or more required sections | Phase 4 was interrupted or the skill terminated early | Re-run /brainstorm with the same goal; verify all 5 sections (Problem Statement, Approaches Considered, Selected Approach, Open Questions, Next Step: /plan) are present in the output. |
.agents/brainstorm/ directory not created | The skill could not create the directory (permissions or path issue) | Manually create it with mkdir -p .agents/brainstorm and re-run. |
/plan invocation in "Next Step" section is generic or incomplete | The selected approach was not specific enough to generate a concrete plan command | Edit the output file to refine the selected approach, then craft a /plan invocation that includes the approach name and key constraints. |
| Brainstorm produces only one approach in Phase 3 | The problem space is narrow or the goal is overly constrained | Widen the goal slightly or explicitly ask for alternative approaches (e.g., "consider a caching approach and a query optimization approach"). |