divergent-agents

Post-generation diversity audit that scores whether a set of ideas are actually different from each other or just surface variations of the same thought. Use AFTER any brainstorming, ideation, or creative generation — from any source, any skill, any person — when you need to know if your "ten different ideas" are actually ten ideas or three ideas wearing costumes. Triggers on "are these actually different," "these all feel the same," "did I just write the same idea five times," "check these for diversity," "which of these overlap," or any moment after generating a list where the user wants to know what they actually have before moving forward. Also use automatically as a quality gate after any other creative skill produces output, or when a user pastes in a list of ideas from anywhere and wants them audited. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. This is the bullshit detector for brainstorms.

Generate deliberately terrible ideas, then reverse-engineer the hidden value inside them. Use as a creative de-inhibitor when the user or the AI is stuck producing safe, polished, "good" ideas that all feel the same. Triggers on "I'm stuck," "everything I come up with is boring," "I can't get past the obvious," "give me something wild," "help me loosen up," or any moment where the quality filter is killing creativity before it starts. Also use when a brainstorm feels constrained, when every idea sounds like it came from a committee, or when the user needs permission to be ridiculous before they can be brilliant. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. This skill is not about being random. It's about using intentional badness as a door to territory that "good" thinking can never reach. Generating bad ideas on purpose is psychologically different from generating good ideas and hoping some are weird.

Map the full problem space before or after ideation to identify what you forgot to think about. Use BEFORE generation to ensure brainstorming covers the whole territory, or AFTER generation to check whether your ideas left entire regions of the problem unaddressed. Triggers on "what am I missing," "what haven't I thought of," "is there a blind spot here," "what else should I consider," "did I cover everything," or any moment where the user suspects their thinking has been thorough within a narrow band but oblivious to adjacent territory. Also use when a brainstorm feels solid but suspiciously focused, when an Anti-Homogeneity Check returns a high grade but the ideas still feel incomplete, or when a strategy covers the offensive plan but has no defensive layer. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. This is the skill that asks not "are your ideas different?" but "what parts of the problem did you forget existed?"

Transform polished AI-generated text into authentic human-sounding copy. Use when user wants to "de-slop," "humanize," "de-AI," "make sound human," "add personality to," or "degunk" any AI-written content—emails, LinkedIn posts, marketing copy, etc. Also triggers on requests to make text sound "less robotic," "more natural," or "like a real person wrote it."

Generate questions, not answers. Use when the user needs to reframe a problem, explore a space they don't fully understand, challenge assumptions in an industry or process, or find the door that better ideas could walk through. Triggers on "what questions should I be asking," "what am I not seeing," "help me think about this differently," "what would a beginner ask," or any moment where the user is stuck not because they lack solutions but because they're asking the wrong questions. Also use when a problem space feels stale, when experts have been working on something for years without progress, when an industry or field does things "because that's how it's done," or when the user says "I don't even know what to ask." Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. This skill produces questions that open doors. Other skills walk through them.

Force genuinely divergent ideation using Guilford's five-dimension framework, backed by empirical research from Nature Communications (LiveIdeaBench). Use when generating ideas, exploring approaches, developing hypotheses, finding angles, designing solutions, or any task where the user needs multiple genuinely different options — not surface variations of the same thought. Triggers on "brainstorm," "give me ideas," "what are my options," "explore possibilities," "think broadly," "what else could this be," "I need approaches," or any request for a list of options. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. Use INSTEAD of generic list-making. The difference between this skill and a normal brainstorm is the difference between asking five people in the same room and asking five people in different buildings.

Force creative solutions using only the resources already available — no new budget, no new hires, no new tools, no new anything. Use when the user is stuck because they think they need something they don't have, when budget is zero, when time is short, when "we can't afford to" is the refrain, or when the obvious next step is "get more resources" and that's not an option. Also triggers on "I have no budget," "we're working with what we've got," "what can I do with what I have," "we can't hire anyone," "bootstrap this," or any moment where constraints feel like the problem but might actually be the solution. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. The best ideas in history were built from leftovers. This skill forces you to inventory what's already in the room and build from that — nothing else.

Break AI creative homogeneity by generating ideas through radically different constructed personas. Use when you need ideas that don't all sound like they came from the same brain — naming, strategy, positioning, content angles, product concepts, campaign ideas, experimental approaches, policy framings, architectural decisions, or any creative or strategic task where diversity of thought matters more than volume. Triggers on "give me different perspectives," "I want ideas that aren't all the same," "think about this from different angles," "what would different people say," or any brainstorming request where the user needs genuine variety rather than ten versions of one thought. Also use when output from other brainstorming feels too samey, too clustered, or when the user says "these all feel like the same idea." Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research.

Introduce genuine randomness into ideation by injecting an unrelated word or concept and forcing deep structural connections between it and the problem. Use when every other thinking approach has been exhausted, when output feels like it came from a brain that's been staring at the same problem too long, when structured creativity tools are producing diminishing returns, or when the user wants ideas from territory that no deliberate method can reach. Triggers on "give me something totally random," "I need a completely different angle," "surprise me," "throw something weird at this," or any moment where the user needs an uncontrolled variable injected into a controlled process. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. This is the only skill in the stack that uses randomness as a mechanism. Every other skill uses structure. This one uses chaos — deliberately.

Force compressed, high-conviction creative output by killing deliberation. Use for any creative or generative task where the user needs gut-level ideas, not carefully reasoned positions — naming, taglines, concepts, pitches, angles, hooks, opening lines, hypotheses, approaches, framings, or any generative task where overthinking is the enemy. Triggers on "just give me something fast," "stop overthinking it," "gut reaction," "quick ideas," "rapid fire," "don't think too hard," "what's your instinct," or when previous creative output feels overworked, hedged, safe, or like it was written by a committee. Also use when the user asks for a high volume of raw options and doesn't need any of them explained or justified. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. This skill is the opposite of chain-of-thought reasoning. It is the creative equivalent of "don't look down."

Strip rich briefs down to their raw human desire before ideating, forcing AI to generate from internal associations rather than anchoring on provided details. Use BEFORE any brainstorming, ideation, or generation when the user has provided a detailed brief, background context, multiple constraints, or a long description of what they want. Triggers when you notice yourself about to rephrase the user's own words back to them as "ideas," when a prompt contains more than 2-3 sentences of context, or when the user says "I keep getting back what I put in," "the ideas just restate my brief," or "give me something I haven't already thought of." Also use when output from other skills feels anchored or overly shaped by the input. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research — wherever professional language is anchoring the output.

"Push AI output away from generic, convergent thinking toward counterintuitive and genuinely novel approaches. Use when output feels too safe, too obvious, too \"AI-sounding,\" or when you need solutions that would make domain experts defensive rather than comfortable. Triggers on requests to \"think differently,\" \"push harder,\" \"give me something unexpected,\" \"think wrong,\" or when the user says output is \"too generic,\" \"too safe,\" \"boring,\" or \"what everyone else would say.\" Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research — wherever the consensus answer exists and the user needs what's outside it. Also use when the user hasn't explicitly asked for conventional advice and the problem is non-trivial. ---"

Generate ideas at deliberate points along the originality-feasibility spectrum, from moonshots to Monday-morning moves. Use when the user needs to see the full range of what's possible — not just "good ideas" but the actual shape of the option space from wild to safe. Triggers on "give me a range," "what are my options from conservative to aggressive," "I want to see the whole spectrum," "what's the bold version and what's the safe version," "give me the crazy idea and the realistic one," or any moment where the user needs to make a strategic choice about HOW ambitious to be, not just WHAT to do. Also use when every idea in a brainstorm clusters at the same risk level — all safe, or all moonshots — and the user can't see the tradeoffs because there's nothing to compare against. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. This skill doesn't pick a point on the spectrum. It shows you the whole line and lets you choose.

Check whether you're solving the right problem before generating solutions. Use BEFORE any ideation when the problem as stated feels stuck, when every solution feels inadequate, when the obvious answers have already been tried and failed, or when a problem has persisted despite smart people working on it. Triggers on "we've tried everything," "nothing is working," "we keep solving this but it comes back," "I feel like we're missing something," "why can't we fix this," or any moment where the quality of available solutions seems suspiciously low for the amount of effort being applied. If every solution to a problem feels mediocre, the problem might be wrong. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. Also use as a pre-check before any expensive brainstorm — five minutes confirming you're solving the right problem is cheaper than two hours generating brilliant answers to the wrong one.

The starting point for the Divergent Thinking Tools skill stack — a Paralogy product. Use this guide to determine which skill to use for any given problem. Consult this router FIRST whenever the user needs non-obvious thinking of any kind — whether they're a scientist exploring a research question, a CEO facing a strategic decision, a founder building a product, a creator developing an idea, an engineer designing a system, a policymaker crafting legislation, or anyone stuck on a problem where the obvious answers aren't good enough. These tools work on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research — wherever the default thinking feels too safe, too convergent, or too similar to what everyone else would say. Don't wait for the user to say "brainstorm" — if the situation calls for thinking that goes beyond the probable, start here.