discover

name	discover
description	Exploratory conversation before /product-spec. Asks one question at a time, runs background research for open-source/off-the-shelf alternatives, and writes DISCOVERY_NOTES.md. Use when the user has an idea but hasn't scoped it yet.
argument-hint	[idea description] [--lean]
allowed-tools	Read, Write, Edit, AskUserQuestion, Agent, WebSearch, WebFetch, Bash, Grep, Glob

Explore a project idea through conversation and produce discovery notes for /product-spec.

Workflow

Discovery Progress:
- [ ] Phase 1: Listen & orient
- [ ] Phase 2: Explore (conversational Q&A)
- [ ] Phase 3: Background research (non-blocking)
- [ ] Phase 4: Synthesis — write DISCOVERY_NOTES.md
- [ ] Phase 5: Update plans/PLAN_STATUS.md
- [ ] Phase 6: Handoff to /product-spec

Lean Mode (--lean)

When --lean is passed:

• Tighter research scope — search for fewer terms, only surface findings that would change the direction entirely (e.g., a mature open-source tool that solves the exact problem).
• Skip the "Open Questions" review with the user — just write them into the notes.

Phase 1: Listen & Orient

1. Read the user's initial description (the argument or first message).
2. If the project directory has existing code, quickly orient:
   • git log --oneline -10 (if git repo)
   • Read CLAUDE.md or README.md if they exist
   • Quick ls of top-level structure
3. Assess what's already clear from the initial description vs. what's ambiguous. Mentally categorize each of these as "known" or "needs exploration":
   • Problem / motivation
   • Audience / users
   • Platform (web, mobile, CLI, etc.)
   • Core experience
   • Tech stack preferences
   • Scope / what "done" looks like

Do NOT output a long preamble. Acknowledge the idea in 1-2 sentences, then go straight to your first question.

Phase 2: Explore

Ask questions one at a time via AskUserQuestion. Follow threads — if the user's answer raises something interesting, dig into that before moving to the next topic.

Smart-skip: Only ask about areas marked "needs exploration" from Phase 1. If the user's initial description already answers a question clearly, skip it.

Question Areas (ask in whatever order fits the conversation)

1. What's the real problem? Not "what do you want to build" — what's the pain, desire, or motivation? Why now?
2. Who's it for? Just you? A team? Public users? A demo/interview? This shapes every decision.
3. What does "done" look like? What would you show someone to prove this works? What's the minimum that would make you happy?
4. What exists already? Have you seen anything similar? Anything you like or dislike about existing tools?
5. Tech inclinations? Any stack preferences, constraints, or things you want to learn? Deployment target?
6. What's the most exciting part? Where should we spend the most energy? What makes this interesting to you?

Recommendations

When you have a genuine, informed recommendation for a question, include it with a brief explanation of why. Don't force recommendations where you don't have a real basis for one — many discovery questions are purely about understanding the user's intent, not making a choice.

Good recommendation: "I'd lean web here — dashboards are naturally browser-based, and you avoid app store friction." (There's a real rationale based on the problem domain.)

Bad recommendation: "My instinct is this is a personal tool." (You're just guessing about the user's intent — ask instead.)

Conversation Rules

• One question at a time. Do not batch. Wait for the answer.
• Follow threads. If the answer to Q1 raises something interesting about scope, explore that before asking Q3.
• Be a collaborator, not an interrogator. Riff on ideas. Get excited about what's exciting. Suggest possibilities the user might not have considered.
• Don't auto-decide. This is the phase where the user is thinking out loud. Every question is worth asking (if not already answered). Your recommendations are suggestions, not decisions.
• Don't give implementation opinions yet. This is about the problem space and scope, not architecture. Tech stack preferences are fine to surface, but don't recommend specific libraries or patterns.

Escape Hatch

If the user says "just build it," "let's go," "enough questions," or expresses impatience:

• Ask one final clarifying question — the single most important unanswered question.
• If they push back again, stop immediately and proceed to Phase 4.

When to Move On

Move to Phase 4 when you have enough clarity to write a useful summary. You don't need every question answered — "Open Questions" exist for a reason. Typically 3-6 questions is enough.

Phase 3: Background Research (Non-Blocking)

Launch as soon as the idea is clear enough — typically after the user answers the first 1-2 questions. Do not wait until Phase 2 is complete.

Launch a single background Agent (run_in_background: true) with this mission:

Search for open-source projects, off-the-shelf products, and existing tools related to: {1-2 sentence description of what the user wants to build}.

Categorize every finding into exactly one of these three buckets:

Use Directly — Could replace building this entirely. Solves the core problem as-is or with minimal configuration.

Leverage — Libraries, frameworks, APIs, or components that handle significant parts of the work. The user would still build their own product but stand on these.

Take Inspiration From — Projects with good architecture, UX patterns, or approaches worth studying. Not directly usable but instructive.

For each finding, include:

• Name and URL (GitHub link or product page)
• 1-2 sentence description of what it does
• Why it's relevant to this specific project
• Which bucket it belongs to and why

Search for:

• GitHub repos: "{problem domain} open source", "{key feature} library {likely language}"
• Products: "{problem domain} tool", "{problem domain} SaaS"
• Package registries: relevant npm/PyPI/crates packages if tech stack is known

Return 3-8 findings total, prioritizing quality over quantity. If you find something in the "Use Directly" bucket, make sure to note it prominently.

CRITICAL: Do not interrupt the Phase 2 conversation when results arrive. Research findings are only used in Phase 4 when writing DISCOVERY_NOTES.md.

Phase 4: Synthesis

Read ~/.claude/skills/shared/PLAN_STATUS.md before writing files.

Write DISCOVERY_NOTES.md to plans/greenfield/DISCOVERY_NOTES.md by default, creating plans/greenfield/ if needed. Keep the legacy root DISCOVERY_NOTES.md path only as a fallback when the user explicitly asks for it.

Before writing:

1. Ensure plans/ exists.
2. Read plans/PLAN_STATUS.md if it exists.
3. If another path is listed as Current plan with Current status: active, ask whether this discovery supersedes it, is research-only, or should abort.
4. If discovery supersedes an existing greenfield plan, archive a snapshot under plans/archive/YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS-greenfield/ before overwriting notes.

Wait for the background research agent to complete before writing. If it hasn't finished, wait briefly — this is the one place where research blocks.

Document Structure

# Discovery Notes

Generated: {date}
Source: /discover conversation

## Idea Summary
{1-2 paragraph synthesis of what the user wants to build and why. Capture the energy and intent, not just the facts.}

## Key Decisions
- **Problem:** {what we're solving, in the user's words}
- **Audience:** {who it's for}
- **Platform:** {web/mobile/CLI/desktop/etc., or "TBD" if not discussed}
- **Stack preferences:** {any that emerged, or "none expressed"}
- **MVP scope:** {what "done" looks like — the minimum that would make the user happy}
- **Exciting part:** {where the user wants to focus energy}

## Open Questions
{Bulleted list of things we didn't resolve. These become questions for /product-spec.}

## Existing Solutions & Tools

### Use Directly
{Tools/products that could replace building this. If none found, say "None found that solve the full problem."}

### Leverage
{Libraries, frameworks, APIs worth building on top of.}

### Take Inspiration From
{Projects with good patterns, architecture, or UX to study.}

## Raw Context
{2-5 notable quotes or details from the conversation that capture nuance /product-spec should know. Things that wouldn't fit in the structured sections above.}

If research returned no findings: Include the Existing Solutions section with "No relevant open-source or off-the-shelf solutions found." under each bucket.

If research found a strong "Use Directly" candidate: Note it clearly but don't editorialize. The user will see it and decide.

Phase 5: Plan Status Update

After writing the file, update plans/PLAN_STATUS.md unless this was explicitly research-only:

• Current plan: plans/greenfield/
• Current type: greenfield
• Current stage: discovery
• Current status: active
• Next command: /product-spec [--lean]

If the user marked the notes research-only, add a research history row instead of changing the current plan.

Phase 6: Handoff

After writing the file:

DISCOVERY_NOTES.md written to {path}

Next: /product-spec [--lean]

That's it. No lengthy summary — the user can read the file.

Error Handling

Situation	Action
Background research agent fails or times out	Write DISCOVERY_NOTES.md without the research section. Add a note: "Background research did not complete. Run WebSearch manually or proceed without."
User provides a fully formed description with no ambiguity	Skip Phase 2 entirely. Run research, write notes, hand off.
User wants to explore multiple ideas	Pick the one they seem most excited about, note the others in "Raw Context" as alternatives worth revisiting.
Project already has DISCOVERY_NOTES.md	Ask: archive then overwrite, overwrite, or abort. Prefer archive snapshots under plans/archive/ over loose .bak files.