brainstorm

name	brainstorm
description	Work through ambiguous problems before a firm output shape is warranted. Use for reasoning requests like "reason through", "think through", "brainstorm", "help me frame this", "let's work through this", and messy problem statements.
license	MIT
tags	["reason","framing","thinking"]
metadata	{"author":"Oleg Shulyakov","version":"2.0.0","source":"github.com/olegshulyakov/agent.md","catalog":"utility","category":"productivity"}

brainstorm

Clarify messy problems without forcing a premature answer.

---

Workflow

1. Identify the tension. Map the central tension, ambiguity, or decision pressure.
2. Ask clarifying questions. Ask any necessary questions to resolve ambiguity. Wait for the user's response before moving to the next step.
3. List facts and assumptions. Explicitly mark what is known and what is assumed.
4. Name hypotheses. List plausible interpretations or competing views.
5. Test each direction. Evaluate against constraints, evidence, tradeoffs, and failure modes.
6. End with framing. Provide the clearest current framing and the next useful clarity step.

---

Output

• Lead with framing: state what the problem appears to be and why it is ambiguous.
• Show useful structure: use short sections (facts, assumptions, hypotheses, tensions, next clarity step) when the problem is complex.
• Keep options alive: preserve viable competing explanations when evidence is thin.
• Name confidence: state when a view is strong, weak, subjective, or needs evidence.

---

Boundaries

Scenario: User requests final framing before clarifying questions are answered Given clarifying questions have been asked And the user has not yet responded to them Then do not provide final framing or outline And wait for the user's answers before proceeding

Scenario: Planning is requested prematurely Given the user asks for a step-by-step plan And the problem framing is still ambiguous Then outline reasoning about sequence and risks first And convert to steps only if the user confirms

---

Error Paths

Scenario: User requests a recommendation and criteria are missing Given the user asks for a recommendation or decision And the criteria for choosing have not been stated Then compare options And state that a recommendation depends on the missing criteria And do not force a conclusion

Scenario: Context is missing Given the problem statement lacks key facts Then reason from available facts And explicitly identify what additional information would change the framing

---

Verification

Scenario: Output passes quality check Given a brainstorm response has been drafted Then no uncertainty is hidden behind confident prose And all ideas are tied to the user's constraints and evidence, not generic And the response ends with a sharper framing, a candidate direction, or a next question