菜单
Facilitate a What If Scenarios session to explore plausible futures, stress-test plans, and surface contingency options. Invoke when the user needs to examine how the project would respond to changes in key assumptions about scope, schedule, budget, or environment.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
Route the user to the right brainstorming strategy for their situation by matching their goal to a curated shortcut table or, when the goal is unclear, asking 3 diagnostic questions and recommending one or two strategies from the curated 20. Invoke when the user wants to brainstorm but has not yet chosen a technique.
Facilitate a Scrum Sprint Planning event, producing a sprint goal and a committed Sprint Backlog drawn from the prioritized Product Backlog. Invoke when the team is about to begin a new sprint and needs to select and plan its work.
Construct a PMBOK-shaped Work Breakdown Structure from the project's epic-and-story hierarchy. Invoke when the team needs a deliverable-oriented decomposition of project scope into manageable work packages before building a schedule or assigning resources.
Draft a PMBOK-shaped project charter from a concept memo or product brief. Invoke when the user needs a charter for initiation-phase documentation.
Produce a PMBOK-shaped project closure report suitable for sponsor signature, consolidating charter, final schedule, final budget, retrospectives, post-mortems, and stakeholder acceptance records. Invoke when the project has reached final deliverable acceptance and requires formal closure documentation.
Produce a PMBOK-shaped communication matrix, escalation paths, and meeting cadence from a project charter and stakeholder register. Invoke when the team needs a formal plan governing how project information flows to each audience.
| name | brainstorming-what-if-scenarios |
| description | Facilitate a What If Scenarios session to explore plausible futures, stress-test plans, and surface contingency options. Invoke when the user needs to examine how the project would respond to changes in key assumptions about scope, schedule, budget, or environment. |
Adapted from bmad-method:bmad-brainstorming (MIT, © 2025 BMad Code, LLC). See THIRD_PARTY_NOTICES.md.
Use this skill when a project plan rests on assumptions that could plausibly change and the team has not yet thought through the response. Typical triggers include:
Do not invoke for root-cause analysis of problems that have already occurred; use Five Whys or Failure Analysis for that purpose. This skill is for prospective exploration of futures that have not yet happened.
Before facilitating, load the canonical reference to ground the session in established scenario-planning practice.
Reading the config. Check .pm-kit.config.json for the sourcesMode field:
sourcesMode is "online" (opt-in): fetch the URL stored at the key sources.whatIfScenarios in vendor/pm-kit/sources-index.json using your available web-fetch capability. Do not name a specific tool — use whatever your runtime provides. Ground the facilitation in what you read. Do not fabricate quotations or page numbers.sourcesMode is "offline" or the field is absent (the default): rely on your general knowledge of scenario planning as developed through strategic planning practice, including the Royal Dutch Shell scenario method and the work of Herman Kahn. Cite the canonical URL from vendor/pm-kit/sources-index.json at key sources.whatIfScenarios in the output. Do not fabricate quotations or page numbers.In both cases, the URL to cite is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scenario_planning.
Walk the user through these steps in sequence. Do not skip steps or combine them.
Step 1 — Identify the focal question. Ask the user to state the central planning question the scenarios will inform. Example: "What is our response if the integration vendor delays delivery by four weeks?" Confirm the question is specific enough to guide scenario construction.
Step 2 — List key assumptions. Ask the user to list the three to five assumptions the current plan depends on most (schedule, budget, vendor commitments, regulatory approvals, technical feasibility). Record each assumption as a stated belief, not a risk.
Step 3 — Generate scenario triggers. For each assumption, ask: "What if this assumption were false — what is the plausible event that would break it?" Generate at least one trigger per assumption. Capture the triggers.
Step 4 — Construct scenarios. Select the two or three triggers that are most consequential and plausible. For each, ask the team to describe: (a) how the project would be affected if this trigger fires, (b) what early warning signals would appear before it fires, and (c) what the team would do in response. Write each scenario as a short narrative.
Step 5 — Cross-scenario review. Ask: "Are there scenarios where two triggers fire simultaneously? How does that compound the impact?" Capture any compound scenarios that are plausible.
Step 6 — Contingency options. For each scenario (and compound scenario), confirm that the team has at least one concrete contingency option — a pre-planned response that can be activated if the trigger fires. Identify which options require advance action (e.g., budget pre-approval, vendor backup contract) versus which can be activated reactively.
Step 7 — Action plan. For each contingency option that requires advance action, confirm: the owner (role or team), the target date or sprint, and the specific first action.
Step 8 — Output. Produce the completed analysis using the structure in TEMPLATE.md (sibling file). Fill every section. Leave no placeholder unfilled.
Step 9 — Save the artifact. Save the filled artifact to docs/pm-kit/outputs/brainstorming-what-if-scenarios/<short-slug>.md. <short-slug> is a kebab-case ASCII slug (max 40 characters) derived from the focal question (e.g., vendor-delay-response). Confirm the final path with the user before writing. If the file exists, ask: overwrite, append a date suffix (e.g., -2026-04-20), or pick a new slug. The artifact begins with the three-line provenance header below (HTML comments, do not render):
<!-- Generated by agentic-pm-kit:brainstorming-what-if-scenarios on YYYY-MM-DD -->
<!-- Languages: communication=<value>, output=<value> -->
<!-- Source mode: offline | online -->
The kit separates the language used for live agent–user dialogue from the language used in the saved artifact. Both values live in .pm-kit.config.json and are free-form strings — read each value verbatim, never infer a language from the conversation, and never select from a hardcoded list.
Facilitation dialogue. Speak to the user during facilitation in the language at language.communication. Use the string verbatim.
Filled artifact (saved TEMPLATE.md output). Produce the written artifact in the language at language.output. If language.output is absent or empty, fall back to language.communication.
Example values either field might contain: "en-US", "es-MX", "Português brasileiro", "Mandarin Chinese". Accept any string as given. This bifurcation is the normative pattern for every skill in the kit.
When the session is complete, point the user to CHECKLIST.md (sibling file) and ask them to verify each item. Remind them that the output must be marked PASS or FAIL. On FAIL, invite the user to return with specific notes so the facilitation can be resumed or corrected.