flame

name	flame
description	Multi-perspective idea evaluation using Six Hats analysis, impact/feasibility scoring, and collaborative shortlisting.
version	1.0.0

Evaluate ideas fairly through multiple perspectives. Surface hidden value, identify risks, and produce a ranked shortlist for Forge. - Spark Bank generated and user wants to evaluate - User provides ideas directly for evaluation - Orchestrator routes to Flame - User invokes `/specsmd-flame`

<degrees_of_freedom> MEDIUM — Structured evaluation with room for user input and collaborative extension. </degrees_of_freedom>

NEVER skip ideas — evaluate ALL ideas, not just obvious favorites (hidden gems exist) NEVER evaluate through a single lens — always use multiple perspectives ALWAYS pause at Red Hat for user's gut feeling (the one required elicitation) ALWAYS present evaluation as multi-dimensional, not pass/fail NEVER dismiss ideas prematurely — look for the kernel of value in each - `.specsmd/ideation/shared/protocols/interaction-adaptation.md` — Generate:60% / Elicit:15% / Co-build:25% - `.specsmd/ideation/shared/protocols/diverge-converge.md` — Convergent mode with structured divergent extensions - `references/six-hats-method.md` — De Bono methodology adapted for AI execution - `references/evaluation-criteria.md` — Impact, feasibility, novelty, risk frameworks Load spark-bank.md from current session Prioritize favorites but include all ideas Accept ideas as input Which ideas would you like to evaluate? You can list them or I can load from a Spark session. For each idea (or top 10-15 if many), perform rapid Six Hats analysis: **{idea title}**

  | Hat | Perspective |
  |-----|------------|
  | White (Facts) | What do we know? What data exists? |
  | Yellow (Benefits) | What's the best case? Why could this work? |
  | Black (Risks) | What could go wrong? What are the dangers? |
  | Green (Creative) | How could this be extended or combined? |
  | Blue (Process) | What would it take to implement? What's the path? |
</format>
<critical>Red Hat is handled separately in step 3 — it requires user input</critical>
<action>Present analysis in batches of 3-5 ideas to avoid overwhelming</action>

For each batch of analyzed ideas, pause and ask: What's your gut feeling on these? Which ones excite you? Which feel wrong despite looking good on paper? Record user's emotional responses If user says "you decide" — infer gut feeling from their Spark favorites and engagement patterns Score each evaluated idea on two axes: **Impact** (1-5): How much value would this create if successful? - 5: Transformative — changes the game entirely - 4: Significant — clear, major improvement - 3: Moderate — useful but not remarkable - 2: Minor — incremental improvement - 1: Negligible — barely noticeable

  **Feasibility** (1-5): How achievable is this?
  - 5: Easy — could start today with existing resources
  - 4: Doable — requires some effort but clearly achievable
  - 3: Challenging — significant effort but realistic
  - 2: Hard — requires major investment or breakthroughs
  - 1: Near-impossible — fundamental barriers exist
</scoring>
<action>Present as a 2x2 matrix view: high-impact/high-feasibility quadrant first</action>

Recommend top 3-5 ideas for Forge based on: - Impact × Feasibility score - User's Red Hat gut feelings - Green Hat creative extensions - Novelty (does this exist already?) Present shortlist with brief rationale for each Does this shortlist feel right? Want to adjust? Generate Flame Report using template: templates/flame-report.md.hbs Save to: .specs-ideation/sessions/{session-id}/flame-report.md Update session.yaml: phase → "flame-complete" Suggest moving to Forge: "Your top {N} ideas are ready to shape into concepts. Ready?" If yes → invoke Forge skill

<output_artifacts>

Artifact	Location	Template
Flame Report	.specs-ideation/sessions/{id}/flame-report.md	./templates/flame-report.md.hbs
</output_artifacts>

<success_criteria> All ideas evaluated (not just favorites) Multiple perspectives applied (Six Hats minimum) User's gut feeling captured (Red Hat) Scoring is multi-dimensional (impact + feasibility minimum) Shortlist reflects both data and intuition Flame Report is clear, organized, and immediately useful </success_criteria>