kwbrainstorm

name	kw:brainstorm
description	Brain dump and compile knowledge before structuring a plan. Use when starting any non-trivial knowledge work — after a meeting, when tackling a new problem, or when you need to pull together what you know before planning.
argument-hint	[topic, brain dump, or meeting notes]

<brain_dump> #$ARGUMENTS </brain_dump>

Brainstorm

Get everything out of your head and into one place. Pull in references. Find the shape of the problem before you commit to a plan.

When to Use

• After a meeting where next steps need to be figured out

• Starting a new project, campaign, or strategy

• "I need to think through X", "Let me brain dump", "Help me figure this out"

• When you have scattered inputs (notes, docs, transcripts) that need organizing

Process

Step 1: Capture the brain dump

Accept whatever the user gives you. This might be:

• A pasted meeting transcript

• A voice-to-text dump

• Bullet points and half-formed thoughts

• A link to a document

• "Here's what I'm thinking about..."

Do not organize yet. Just acknowledge what you received and identify what type of input it is.

If the user hasn't given you anything yet, prompt:

"What are you working on? You can paste meeting notes, describe the problem, or just start talking. I'll help organize it."

Step 2: Extract the core elements

From the brain dump, pull out:

• Key decisions that need to be made

• Open questions that don't have answers yet

• Constraints (timeline, budget, dependencies, blockers)

• Stakeholders and what they care about

• Data points mentioned (numbers, metrics, references)

• Ideas and options that were floated (even half-baked ones)

Present these back as a structured summary:

## What I Heard

**The problem:** [One sentence — what are we trying to figure out?]

**Decisions to make:**
- [Decision 1]
- [Decision 2]

**Open questions:**
- [Question 1]
- [Question 2]

**Constraints:**
- [Timeline, budget, dependencies]

**Stakeholders:**
- [Who] — [what they care about]

**Ideas floated:**
- [Idea 1] — [brief note on pros/cons if mentioned]
- [Idea 2]

**Data points mentioned:**
- [Any numbers, metrics, or references cited]

Step 3: Pull in references (automatic + optional)

<parallel_tasks>

Automatic searches — Run these without asking:

• Search docs/knowledge/ for learnings related to the brain dump topics
• Search plans/ for related past plans
• Search docs/solutions/ for relevant patterns

</parallel_tasks>

For each source found:

**Found:** [source name/path]
**Relevant because:** [one sentence]
**Key takeaway:** [the useful bit]

If nothing relevant is found: "No prior context found in knowledge base or plans."

Optional search — After presenting automatic findings, offer:

"Want me to search externally too? (web, specific documents, other sources)"

If nothing relevant is found, say so. Don't fabricate context.

Step 4: Identify themes and tensions

Look across everything — the brain dump, the extracted elements, and the references — and identify:

• Themes — What keeps coming up? What's the real underlying question?

• Tensions — Where do ideas conflict? Where are there tradeoffs?

• Gaps — What's missing? What hasn't been addressed?

## Themes
1. [Theme] — [why it matters]
2. [Theme] — [why it matters]

## Tensions
- [Option A] vs [Option B] — [the tradeoff]

## Gaps
- [What we don't know yet]
- [What needs more research]

Step 5: Resolve load-bearing questions

Before moving toward a direction, take the open questions and tensions from Step 2 and Step 4 and identify which ones are load-bearing — meaning the plan's structure would change depending on the answer.

Ignore nice-to-know questions. Focus only on ones where different answers lead to different plans. Common load-bearing questions:

• Scope: "Is this a quick win or a multi-phase initiative?"
• Audience: "Who is this for? That changes everything downstream."
• Priority: "You mentioned X and Y — which matters more if we have to choose?"
• Timeline: "Are we talking days, weeks, or months?"
• Owner: "Who's making the final call on this?"
• Constraints: "Is there a budget/resource ceiling I should plan around?"

Use AskUserQuestion to ask 1-3 load-bearing questions at once (never more than 3). Frame each question with options drawn from what surfaced in the brainstorm — don't ask open-ended questions when you already have candidate answers.

Example:

Question: "You mentioned both 'grow trials' and 'improve conversion' — which is the primary goal?" Options: Grow trials (top of funnel) / Improve conversion (bottom of funnel) / Both equally

If all open questions are non-load-bearing (i.e., any answer leads to roughly the same plan), skip this step and say so:

"The open questions won't change the plan's shape — we can resolve them during execution."

Important: This step is a bridge, not an interrogation. 1-3 questions max. The goal is to give /kw:plan clean inputs, not to turn brainstorming into a requirements gathering session.

Step 6: Suggest a direction

Based on everything — including the resolved questions from Step 5 — offer a point of view:

"Based on what I'm seeing, the core question is [X]. The main tension is between [A] and [B]. My suggestion would be to [direction] because [reasoning]. But [caveat]."

This is a suggestion, not a decision. The user decides.

Step 7: Offer next steps

Use AskUserQuestion:

Question: "Brainstorm captured. What next?"

Options:

1. Run /kw:plan — Structure this into an actionable plan
2. Dig deeper — Research a specific theme or question further
3. Push to Proof — Share the brainstorm for team feedback
4. Save and continue later — Write to plans/brainstorm-{descriptive-name}.md
5. Keep going — Add more context or refine the themes

<critical_requirement> If "Save" or "Run /kw:plan" is selected: ALWAYS write the brainstorm to plans/brainstorm-{descriptive-name}.md first. This file becomes the origin document that /kw:plan will search for. Never skip the file write. </critical_requirement>

Important Rules

• Don't jump to solutions. The point of brainstorming is to understand the problem space before committing to a path. Resist the urge to plan.

• Reflect, don't rewrite. When summarizing back, use the user's language. Don't sanitize their thinking into corporate speak.

• Surface tensions early, resolve the load-bearing ones late. Steps 2-4 are for naming conflicts without picking winners. Step 5 is for resolving only the ones that would change the plan's shape. Don't collapse tensions prematurely.

• Pull, don't push. Ask where references might live rather than guessing. The user knows their information landscape better than you do.

• Quantity of input is fine. A 30-minute meeting transcript is good input. Don't ask people to pre-organize before brainstorming — that defeats the purpose.

Pipeline Mode

When invoked with disable-model-invocation context (e.g., from an orchestrator or automation):

• Skip all AskUserQuestion prompts
• Use sensible defaults for all choices
• Write output files without waiting for confirmation
• Proceed to the next suggested skill automatically
• Output structured results that the calling context can parse