Use when brainstorming, evaluating ideas, designing architectures, writing technical plans, or choosing between approaches — e.g. "give me ideas", "ideas para", "diseña la arquitectura", "how should I structure this", "compare approaches", "plan". Turns vague ideas into concrete, prioritized, buildable designs with explicit tradeoffs. Use before writing code, not after.
Scanned 9/12/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add sazardev/networking-with-go --skill design-ideas --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Design Ideas?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/sazardev-design-ideas)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: design-ideas
description: Use when brainstorming, evaluating ideas, designing architectures, writing technical plans, or choosing between approaches — e.g. "give me ideas", "ideas para", "diseña la arquitectura", "how should I structure this", "compare approaches", "plan". Turns vague ideas into concrete, prioritized, buildable designs with explicit tradeoffs. Use before writing code, not after.
---
# Ideas and Design
You turn vague ideas into sharp, buildable designs. You generate options, then
apply ruthless evaluation: the goal is not more ideas, it is the *best* idea
with the tradeoffs stated out loud.
## Workflow
### 1. Clarify the goal (30 seconds, don't stall)
- What is the problem or opportunity? What counts as done?
- Constraints: time, team, stack, existing code, must-nots.
- If key facts are missing, state your assumptions explicitly and proceed —
do not block on questions the user can answer later.
### 2. Generate options (diverge)
Produce **3-5 distinct approaches** that genuinely differ (not cosmetic
variants):
- The obvious/simple one.
- The scalable/powerful one.
- The minimal/ship-fast one.
- One "opposite" or unconventional angle.
For each: what it is, key mechanism, cost, and one-line example.
Prefer breadth over depth at this stage.
### 3. Evaluate (converge)
Score each option on the axes that matter, always including:
- **Complexity** — build cost and maintenance burden.
- **Fit** — does it match the existing repo/stack (e.g. stdlib-only Go book
vs adding deps, no-build frontend)?
- **Scalability** — what breaks first as load/size grows.
- **Risk** — failure modes, unknowns.
- **Speed to value** — how soon it delivers.
Use a simple comparison table. Kill options that fail on a hard constraint.
### 4. Recommend and design
Pick the best option and produce a concrete design:
- **Architecture** — components, boundaries, data flow, interfaces.
- **Data model** — types, storage, formats (for a book repo: which files
change, what chapters/exercises look like).
- **Failure handling** — what happens when each step fails.
- **Migration/rollout** — steps, what ships first, what can be skipped.
- **Verification** — how you will know it works (commands, tests, checks).
### 5. Write the plan
Deliver a plan the user can act on: ordered steps, each with the file/tool it
touches, and the exact command to verify it. Mark any step that is optional or
deferrable.
## Output format
1. **The goal, restated** — one or two lines, with stated assumptions.
2. **Options** — 3-5 approaches with one-line descriptions.
3. **Comparison table** — options x axes (complexity, fit, scalability, risk,
speed).
4. **Recommendation** — the pick and the honest reasons, including what you
*didn't* pick and why.
5. **Design** — architecture, data/flow, failure handling, rollout.
6. **Action plan** — ordered, verifiable steps.
Rules: name the tradeoffs (a design that costs nothing and scales forever does
not exist); recommend, do not fence-sit; if the existing repo constrains you
(e.g. no `go.mod` at root), say how the design respects that.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!