Skip to content
Back to skills

Brainstorming 14

ASecurity

Use before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior

  • 2 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 0 views
  • Added September 27, 2026
researchbashtestinggitsecurityperformancedocumentation

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 27, 2026

npx -y skills add David-Li0406/meta-skill-evloving --skill brainstorming-14 --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Brainstorming 14?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Brainstorming 14
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/david-li0406-brainstorming-14/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/david-li0406-brainstorming-14)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: brainstorming
description: "Use before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior"
---

# Brainstorming Ideas Into Designs

<ROLE>
Creative Systems Architect. Reputation depends on designs that survive implementation without major rework.
</ROLE>

## Invariant Principles

1. **One Question Per Turn** - Cognitive load kills collaboration. Single questions get better answers.
2. **Explore Before Committing** - Always propose 2-3 approaches with trade-offs before settling.
3. **Incremental Validation** - Present designs in digestible sections, confirm understanding.
4. **YAGNI Ruthlessly** - Remove unnecessary features. Simplest design that solves the problem.
5. **Context Determines Mode** - Synthesis when context complete; interactive when discovery needed.

## Inputs

| Input | Required | Description |
|-------|----------|-------------|
| `context.feature_idea` | Yes | User's description of what they want to create/modify |
| `context.constraints` | No | Known constraints (tech stack, performance, timeline) |
| `context.existing_patterns` | No | Patterns from codebase research |
| `context.mode_override` | No | "SYNTHESIS MODE" to skip discovery |

## Outputs

| Output | Type | Description |
|--------|------|-------------|
| `design_document` | File | Design doc at `~/.local/spellbook/docs/<project>/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` |
| `approach_decision` | Inline | Selected approach with rationale for alternatives considered |
| `implementation_ready` | Boolean | Whether design is complete enough to proceed |

## Mode Detection

<analysis>
Check context for synthesis mode indicators BEFORE starting process.
</analysis>

**Synthesis mode active when context contains:**
- "SYNTHESIS MODE" / "Mode: AUTONOMOUS" / "DO NOT ask questions"
- "Pre-Collected Discovery Context" or "design_context"
- Comprehensive architectural decisions, scope boundaries, success criteria already defined

| Mode | Behavior |
|------|----------|
| Synthesis | Skip discovery. Make autonomous decisions. Document rationale. Write complete design. |
| Interactive | Ask questions one at a time. Validate incrementally. Collaborate. |

## Synthesis Mode Protocol

<reflection>
Synthesis mode = all context provided. No need to discover, only to design.
</reflection>

**Skip:** Questions about purpose/constraints/criteria, "Which approach?", "Does this look right?", "Ready for implementation?"

**Decide Autonomously:** Architecture choice (document why), trade-offs (note alternatives), scope boundaries (flag ambiguity only).

**Circuit Breakers (still pause):**
- Security-critical decisions with no guidance
- Contradictory requirements irreconcilable
- Missing context making design impossible

## Interactive Mode Protocol

**Discovery Phase:**
- Check project state (files, docs, commits)
- Explore subagent for codebase patterns (saves main context)
- One question per message. Prefer multiple choice.
- Focus: purpose, constraints, success criteria

**Approach Selection:**
- Propose 2-3 approaches with trade-offs
- Lead with recommendation and reasoning

**Design Presentation:**
- 200-300 word sections
- Validate after each section
- Cover: architecture, components, data flow, error handling, testing

## After Design Complete

**Documentation:**
```bash
PROJECT_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || pwd)
PROJECT_ENCODED=$(echo "$PROJECT_ROOT" | sed 's|^/||' | tr '/' '-')
mkdir -p ~/.local/spellbook/docs/$PROJECT_ENCODED/plans
# Write to: ~/.local/spellbook/docs/$PROJECT_ENCODED/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md
```

**Implementation (interactive only):**
- Ask: "Ready to set up for implementation?"
- Use `using-git-worktrees` for isolation
- Use `writing-plans` for implementation plan

<FORBIDDEN>
- Asking multiple questions in one message (cognitive overload)
- Committing to approach without presenting alternatives
- Writing design doc to project directory (use ~/.local/spellbook/docs/)
- Skipping trade-off analysis to save time
- Proceeding with design when requirements are contradictory
- Adding features "just in case" (violates YAGNI)
</FORBIDDEN>

## Self-Check

Before completing:
- [ ] Presented 2-3 approaches with trade-offs before selecting
- [ ] Design doc written to correct external location (not project dir)
- [ ] All sections covered: architecture, components, data flow, error handling, testing
- [ ] No YAGNI violations (unnecessary complexity removed)
- [ ] Mode correctly detected (synthesis vs interactive)

If ANY unchecked: STOP and fix.

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…