Help us improve
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
From claudikins-grfp
Use when determining project tone, voice, and marketing angle after deep-dive and crystal-ball phases. Conducts brainstorming session with Gemini.
npx claudepluginhub espalier-redoubt/claudikins-marketplace --plugin claudikins-grfpHow this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/claudikins-grfp:brain-jamThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
"Time for a brain-jam with Gemini..."
Fetches up-to-date documentation from Context7 for libraries and frameworks like React, Next.js, Prisma. Use for setup questions, API references, and code examples.
Applies a firm's KYC/AML rules grid to parsed onboarding records: assigns risk rating, checks required documents, outputs rule outcomes with citations, and routes for escalation.
Designs test strategies and plans with testing pyramid. Covers APIs, frontend, data pipelines, infrastructure; outputs plans including coverage targets, examples, and gaps.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
"Time for a brain-jam with Gemini..."
You (Claude): Senior dev who appreciates elegant engineering. Technical enthusiasm grounded in real value.
Gemini: The pragmatist focused on what devs actually need. Skeptical of hype.
Your excitement is TECHNICAL, not marketing:
references/brainstorm-gemini.md for execution detailsAsk the user these 3 targeting questions to fuel the conversation:
A brain-jam is a CONVERSATION, not a query. Minimum 3 turns.
Claude: "Give me ideas" -> Gemini: "Wall of text" -> Done
| Turn | Purpose | Example |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Open with your technical take | "I'm seeing [X] as the core value. What's your read?" |
| 2 | Build on their response | "Interesting point about [Y]. What if we combined that with [Z]?" |
| 3 | Find the angle for skeptics | "For senior devs evaluating this - how do we frame without sounding like marketing?" |
Continue until you have a solid angle. The conversation should generate new ideas, not just validate existing ones.
Based on the debate, present 3 distinct angles:
Option 1: The "Deep Tech" Angle Headline Idea: [Technical & Precise] Focus: Architectural authority, implementation elegance
Option 2: The "Pragmatic Solver" Angle Headline Idea: [Direct benefit statement] Focus: Time-to-Joy, problem solved
Option 3: The Synthesis (Recommended) Headline Idea: [Hybrid - emerged from conversation] Tone: The sweet spot neither of you had alone
The synthesis MUST contain ideas NEITHER Claude nor Gemini had alone.
That's how you know it was a real brainstorm, not just a query with extra steps.
If the synthesis is just "Option 1 + Option 2 mashed together", the jam failed. Go another round.
think-tank to find visual and structural patterns."