| name | Brainstorming Ideas Into Designs |
| description | Interactive idea refinement using Socratic method to develop fully-formed designs |
| when_to_use | when partner describes any feature or project idea, before writing code or implementation plans |
| version | 2.2.0 |
Brainstorming Ideas Into Designs
Overview
Transform rough ideas into fully-formed designs through structured questioning and alternative exploration.
Core principle: Ask questions to understand, explore alternatives, present design incrementally for validation.
Announce at start: "I'm using the Brainstorming skill to refine your idea into a design."
The Process
Phase 1: Understanding
- Check current project state in working directory
- Ask ONE question at a time to refine the idea
- Prefer multiple choice when possible
- Gather: Purpose, constraints, success criteria
Phase 2: Exploration
- Propose 2-3 different approaches
- For each: Core architecture, trade-offs, complexity assessment
- Ask your human partner which approach resonates
Phase 3: Design Presentation
- Present in 200-300 word sections
- Cover: Architecture, components, data flow, error handling, testing
- Ask after each section: "Does this look right so far?"
Phase 4: Worktree Setup (for implementation)
When design is approved and implementation will follow:
- Announce: "I'm using the Using Git Worktrees skill to set up an isolated workspace."
- Switch to skills/collaboration/using-git-worktrees
- Follow that skill's process for directory selection, safety verification, and setup
- Return here when worktree ready
Phase 5: Planning Handoff
Ask: "Ready to create the implementation plan?"
When your human partner confirms (any affirmative response):
- Announce: "I'm using the Writing Plans skill to create the implementation plan."
- Switch to skills/collaboration/writing-plans skill
- Create detailed plan in the worktree
When to Revisit Earlier Phases
You can and should go backward when:
- Partner reveals new constraint during Phase 2 or 3 → Return to Phase 1 to understand it
- Validation shows fundamental gap in requirements → Return to Phase 1
- Partner questions approach during Phase 3 → Return to Phase 2 to explore alternatives
- Something doesn't make sense → Go back and clarify
Don't force forward linearly when going backward would give better results.
Related Skills
During exploration:
- When approaches have genuine trade-offs: skills/architecture/preserving-productive-tensions
Before proposing changes to existing code:
- Understand why it exists: skills/research/tracing-knowledge-lineages
Remember
- One question per message during Phase 1
- Apply YAGNI ruthlessly
- Explore 2-3 alternatives before settling
- Present incrementally, validate as you go
- Go backward when needed - flexibility > rigid progression
- Announce skill usage at start
