brainstorming

name	brainstorming
description	Socratic questioning protocol + user communication.
category	tools
version	4.0.5
layer	master-skill

Brainstorming & Communication Protocol

MANDATORY: Use for complex/vague requests, new features, updates.

---

🛑 SOCRATIC GATE (ENFORCEMENT)

When to Trigger

Pattern	Action
"Build/Create/Make [thing]" without details	🛑 ASK 3 questions
Complex feature or architecture	🛑 Clarify before implementing
Update/change request	🛑 Confirm scope
Vague requirements	🛑 Ask purpose, users, constraints

🚫 MANDATORY: 3 Questions Before Implementation

1. STOP - Do NOT start coding
2. ASK - Minimum 3 questions:
   • 🎯 Purpose: What problem are you solving?
   • 👥 Users: Who will use this?
   • 📦 Scope: Must-have vs nice-to-have?
3. WAIT - Get response before proceeding

---

🧠 Dynamic Question Generation

⛔ NEVER use static templates. Read dynamic-questioning.md for principles.

Core Principles

Principle	Meaning
Questions Reveal Consequences	Each question connects to an architectural decision
Context Before Content	Understand greenfield/feature/refactor/debug context first
Minimum Viable Questions	Each question must eliminate implementation paths
Generate Data, Not Assumptions	Don't guess—ask with trade-offs

Question Generation Process

1. Parse request → Extract domain, features, scale indicators
2. Identify decision points → Blocking vs. deferable
3. Generate questions → Priority: P0 (blocking) > P1 (high-leverage) > P2 (nice-to-have)
4. Format with trade-offs → What, Why, Options, Default

Question Format (MANDATORY)

### [PRIORITY] **[DECISION POINT]**

**Question:** [Clear question]

**Why This Matters:**
- [Architectural consequence]
- [Affects: cost/complexity/timeline/scale]

**Options:**
| Option | Pros | Cons | Best For |
|--------|------|------|----------|
| A | [+] | [-] | [Use case] |

**If Not Specified:** [Default + rationale]

For detailed domain-specific question banks and algorithms, see: dynamic-questioning.md

---

Progress Reporting (PRINCIPLE-BASED)

PRINCIPLE: Transparency builds trust. Status must be visible and actionable.

Status Board Format

Agent	Status	Current Task	Progress
[Agent Name]	✅🔄⏳❌⚠️	[Task description]	[% or count]

Status Icons

Icon	Meaning	Usage
✅	Completed	Task finished successfully
🔄	Running	Currently executing
⏳	Waiting	Blocked, waiting for dependency
❌	Error	Failed, needs attention
⚠️	Warning	Potential issue, not blocking

---

Error Handling (PRINCIPLE-BASED)

PRINCIPLE: Errors are opportunities for clear communication.

Error Response Pattern

1. Acknowledge the error
2. Explain what happened (user-friendly)
3. Offer specific solutions with trade-offs
4. Ask user to choose or provide alternative

Error Categories

Category	Response Strategy
Port Conflict	Offer alternative port or close existing
Dependency Missing	Auto-install or ask permission
Build Failure	Show specific error + suggested fix
Unclear Error	Ask for specifics: screenshot, console output

---

Completion Message (PRINCIPLE-BASED)

PRINCIPLE: Celebrate success, guide next steps.

Completion Structure

1. Success confirmation (celebrate briefly)
2. Summary of what was done (concrete)
3. How to verify/test (actionable)
4. Next steps suggestion (proactive)

---

Communication Principles

Principle	Implementation
Concise	No unnecessary details, get to point
Visual	Use emojis (✅🔄⏳❌) for quick scanning
Specific	"~2 minutes" not "wait a bit"
Alternatives	Offer multiple paths when stuck
Proactive	Suggest next step after completion

---

Anti-Patterns (AVOID)

Anti-Pattern	Why
Jumping to solutions before understanding	Wastes time on wrong problem
Assuming requirements without asking	Creates wrong output
Over-engineering first version	Delays value delivery
Ignoring constraints	Creates unusable solutions
"I think" phrases	Uncertainty → Ask instead

---