Brainstorming

Domain skill for multi-option exploration and collaborative decision-making before implementation.

Iron Law

EXPLORE BEFORE COMMITTING. The cost of choosing wrong is 10x the cost of exploring options.

Every hour spent exploring saves a day of rework from the wrong approach.

When to Brainstorm

• Multiple valid approaches exist (and you know it)
• Requirements are unclear or ambiguous
• New territory — no existing patterns to follow
• User says "help me think through" or "what are our options"
• You catch yourself defaulting to the first idea

Exploration Process

Track the brainstorming lifecycle with tasks:

TaskCreate("Clarify goal", "Confirm what, why, who before generating options")
TaskCreate("Check existing patterns", "Search codebase for how similar problems are solved")
TaskCreate("Generate approaches", "Produce 2-4 distinct approaches with pros, cons, effort, risk")
TaskCreate("Compare and recommend", "Build comparison table, highlight trade-offs, recommend")
TaskCreate("User decision", "Present recommendation, get user choice, log decision")

1. Clarify the Goal

TaskUpdate("Clarify goal", status: "in_progress")

Before generating options, confirm you understand:

• What needs to happen (outcome, not implementation)
• Why it needs to happen (motivation, constraints)
• Who is affected (users, systems, team)

Use AskUserQuestion if the goal is ambiguous. Don't guess.

TaskUpdate("Clarify goal", status: "completed")

2. Check Existing Patterns

TaskUpdate("Check existing patterns", status: "in_progress")

Before proposing new approaches, see what the codebase already does:

# How does the project handle similar problems?
grep -r "relevant_pattern" --include="*.{ts,js,py,rb}" -l
git log --oneline --all --grep="related keyword" | head -10

Existing patterns get priority — consistency has value.

TaskUpdate("Check existing patterns", status: "completed")

3. Generate 2-4 Approaches

TaskUpdate("Generate approaches", status: "in_progress")

For each approach, fill out:

Field	Content
Name	Short, memorable label
Summary	One-line description
Pros	Bullet list of advantages
Cons	Bullet list of disadvantages
Effort	Small / Medium / Large
Risk	Low / Medium / High

Rules:

• Minimum 2 approaches, maximum 4
• Approaches must be genuinely distinct (not minor variations)
• Include the "do nothing" or "simplest possible" option when applicable
• Each approach must be implementable — no hand-waving

TaskUpdate("Generate approaches", status: "completed")

4. Compare Trade-offs

TaskUpdate("Compare and recommend", status: "in_progress")

Build a comparison table across key dimensions:

Dimension	Approach A	Approach B	Approach C
Simplicity
Flexibility
Performance
Consistency
Effort
Risk

TaskUpdate("Compare and recommend", status: "completed")

5. Recommend and Decide

TaskUpdate("User decision", status: "in_progress")

• State your recommendation with rationale
• Highlight the most important trade-off
• Let the user choose — recommendation is not a decision
• Use AskUserQuestion for the final decision

TaskUpdate("User decision", status: "completed") after user selects an approach. Use TaskList to confirm the full brainstorming lifecycle completed.

Trade-Off Dimensions

Common dimensions to evaluate (pick the relevant ones):

Dimension	Tension
Simplicity vs Flexibility	Simple now vs adaptable later
Speed vs Correctness	Ship fast vs get it right
Consistency vs Innovation	Follow patterns vs better approach
Build vs Buy	Custom solution vs existing library
Coupling vs Convenience	Decoupled modules vs easy implementation
Explicit vs Implicit	Verbose but clear vs concise but magical

Anti-Patterns

Anti-Pattern	Symptom	Fix
Analysis paralysis	>4 options, endless comparison	Cap at 4. Decide with available info.
False dichotomy	"We can only do A or B"	Challenge the constraint. Usually there's a C.
Bikeshedding	30 min debating variable names	Is this decision reversible? If yes, just pick one.
Anchoring	First option dominates discussion	Present all options before discussing any.
Groupthink	Everyone agrees immediately	Play devil's advocate. What could go wrong?

Rationalization Prevention

Excuse	Response
"Let's just go with the obvious approach"	Obvious to whom? Explore first, then decide.
"We don't have time to brainstorm"	You don't have time to rewrite after choosing wrong.
"I've done this before, I know the best way"	Great. Then documenting why takes 2 minutes. Do it.
"All approaches are roughly the same"	Then pick the simplest. If they're truly equivalent, simplicity wins.