'Use before writing any code, scaffolding, or taking implementation action
Scanned 9/29/2026
npx -y skills add Tekkiiiii/the-agency --skill superpowers-brainstorming --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Superpowers Brainstorming?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/tekkiiiii-superpowers-brainstorming)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.
---
name: superpowers-brainstorming
description: 'Use before writing any code, scaffolding, or taking implementation action
— explore intent, requirements, and design through structured Socratic questioning,
trade-off analysis, and formal spec writing. Purpose: Replace assumptions with verified
understanding by asking one clarifying question per message, proposing 2-3 approaches
with explicit trade-offs, getting approval on each design section, and writing a
formal spec before any code is written. Key capabilities: Socratic questioning to
expose unknown unknowns; explicit trade-off framing with AI effort compression (human
time vs. AI time) so the human partner can calibrate scope; "Boil the Lake" — completeness
is cheap when AI handles the boilerplate; Search Before Building to check existing
patterns before reasoning from first principles; spec document written to disk and
reviewed by a subagent before proceeding. When to trigger: before implementing anything
that touches new code or changes existing behavior; when requirements are ambiguous;
during the Explore phase of a new feature or refactor; before scaffolding a new
module or service; when the user says build X without a clear design; before acting
on a vague or high-level request. Also for: scope reduction (unbundle); technical
debt discussions where intent is unclear; spike investigations for high-uncertainty
areas; onboarding new contributors to a codebase.'
---
# Brainstorming Skill
**Purpose:** Explore user intent, requirements, and design before any implementation begins.
## The Iron Rule
**HARD-GATE:** Do NOT invoke any implementation skill, write code, scaffold, or take implementation action until user approves the design.
## Workflow
### Step 1: Explore Project Context
Read existing files, docs, recent commits, and any relevant project state to understand the landscape.
Also load these project-level phase files if they exist:
- `STATE.md` — cross-session decisions, blockers, current state
- `ROADMAP.md` — phases, milestones, progress
- `REQUIREMENTS.md` — scoped requirements with phase traceability
- `{phase}-CONTEXT.md` — implementation decisions for the current phase
These files live in the project root alongside PROJECT.md. They capture context
that should persist across sessions.
### Step 2: Visual Companion (Optional)
Offer once (own message) if visual questions are expected. If accepted, decide per-question whether to use browser vs. terminal based on whether the question would be better understood by seeing vs. reading.
### Step 3: Clarifying Questions
Ask **one question per message**. Refine understanding through Socratic questioning. Explore alternatives and trade-offs.
### Step 4: Propose Approaches
Present 2-3 approaches with trade-offs and a recommendation. Get approval after each section.
### Step 5: Present Design in Sections
Scale each design section to its complexity. Get explicit approval after each section before proceeding.
### Step 6: Write Design Document
Save to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` and commit. Include:
- Problem statement
- Proposed approach
- Key decisions and rationale
- File structure
- API contracts (if applicable)
### Step 7: Spec Review Loop
Dispatch a `spec-document-reviewer` subagent to review the written spec. Fix issues. Max 3 iterations, then surface to human for guidance.
### Step 8: User Reviews Written Spec
User reviews the written spec before proceeding.
### Step 9: Invoke Writing Plans
**Terminal state:** invoke `superpowers-writing-plans` — the only skill to invoke at the end.
## Anti-Pattern
> "This Is Too Simple To Need A Design" — every project goes through this process regardless of perceived simplicity.
## Boil the Lake
When presenting approaches or options, **always recommend the complete implementation** when AI makes the marginal cost near-zero.
**Lake vs ocean:** A lake is boilable (100% coverage, full feature, all edge cases). An ocean is not (system rewrites, multi-quarter migrations).
Show both effort scales: human time vs AI time.
**Compression reference:**
| Task | Human | AI | Compression |
|------|-------|-----|-------------|
| Boilerplate | 2 days | 15 min | ~100x |
| Tests | 1 day | 15 min | ~50x |
| Feature | 1 week | 30 min | ~30x |
| Bug fix | 4 hours | 15 min | ~20x |
| Architecture | 2 days | 4 hours | ~5x |
| Research | 1 day | 3 hours | ~3x |
**Anti-patterns to avoid:**
- Recommending shortcuts when complete costs minutes more
- Deferring tests to follow-up PR
- Quoting only human effort ("This would take 2 weeks")
## Search Before Building
Before proposing solutions, check what exists. Three layers:
- **Layer 1** (tried and true): Standard patterns already in the ecosystem
- **Layer 2** (new and popular): Search for current best practices — but scrutinize them
- **Layer 3** (first principles): Your original reasoning about the specific problem
When Layer 3 reasoning reveals conventional wisdom is wrong, name it:
```
EUREKA: Everyone does X because [assumption]. But [evidence] shows Y is better.
```
Log eureka moments to project memory for future reference.
## Integration
- **Required sub-skill:** `superpowers-writing-plans` — invoked at the end
- **Called by:** `superpowers-using-superpowers`
- **Creates:** design document at `docs/superpowers/specs/`
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!