Skill

brainstorm

Install
1
Install the plugin
$
npx claudepluginhub yonatangross/orchestkit --plugin ork

Want just this skill?

Add to a custom plugin, then install with one command.

Description

Design exploration with parallel agents. Use when brainstorming ideas, exploring solutions, or comparing alternatives.

Tool Access

This skill is limited to using the following tools:

AskUserQuestionTaskReadGrepGlobTaskCreateTaskUpdateTaskListTaskOutputTaskStopToolSearchmcp__memory__search_nodes
Supporting Assets
View in Repository
assets/idea-evaluation-template.md
checklists/brainstorm-completion.md
checklists/brainstorm-session-checklist.md
examples/orchestkit-feature-brainstorm.md
references/common-pitfalls.md
references/devils-advocate-prompts.md
references/divergent-techniques.md
references/evaluation-rubric.md
references/example-session-auth.md
references/example-session-dashboard.md
references/phase-workflow.md
references/socratic-questions.md
rules/_sections.md
rules/agent-count-limit.md
rules/complexity-ceiling.md
rules/convergence-requirement.md
rules/feasibility-filter.md
scripts/create-design-doc.md
scripts/decision-matrix-template.md
scripts/design-doc-template.md
Skill Content

Brainstorming Ideas Into Designs

Transform rough ideas into fully-formed designs through intelligent agent selection and structured exploration.

Core principle: Analyze the topic, select relevant agents dynamically, explore alternatives in parallel, present design incrementally.

Argument Resolution

TOPIC = "$ARGUMENTS"  # Full argument string, e.g., "API design for payments"
# $ARGUMENTS[0] is the first token (CC 2.1.59 indexed access)

STEP -1: MCP Probe + Resume Check

Load: Read("${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/chain-patterns/references/mcp-detection.md")

# 1. Probe MCP servers (once at skill start)
ToolSearch(query="select:mcp__memory__search_nodes")
ToolSearch(query="select:mcp__sequential-thinking__sequentialthinking")

# 2. Store capabilities
Write(".claude/chain/capabilities.json", {
  "memory": probe_memory.found,
  "sequential_thinking": probe_st.found,
  "skill": "brainstorm",
  "timestamp": now()
})

# 3. Check for resume (prior session may have crashed)
state = Read(".claude/chain/state.json")  # may not exist
if state.skill == "brainstorm" and state.status == "in_progress":
    # Skip completed phases, resume from state.current_phase
    last_handoff = Read(f".claude/chain/{state.last_handoff}")

Phase Handoffs

PhaseHandoff FileContents
000-topic-analysis.jsonAgent list, tier, topic classification
101-memory-context.jsonPrior patterns, codebase signals
202-divergent-ideas.json10+ raw ideas
303-feasibility.jsonFiltered viable ideas
404-evaluation.jsonRated + devil's advocate results
505-synthesis.jsonTop 2-3 approaches, trade-off table

STEP 0: Project Context Discovery

BEFORE creating tasks or selecting agents, detect the project tier. This becomes the complexity ceiling for all downstream decisions.

Auto-Detection (scan codebase)

# PARALLEL — quick signals (launch all in ONE message)
Grep(pattern="take-home|assignment|interview|hackathon", glob="README*", output_mode="content")
Grep(pattern="take-home|assignment|interview|hackathon", glob="*.md", output_mode="content")
Glob(pattern=".github/workflows/*")
Glob(pattern="**/Dockerfile")
Glob(pattern="**/terraform/**")
Glob(pattern="**/k8s/**")
Glob(pattern="CONTRIBUTING.md")

Tier Classification

SignalTier
README says "take-home", "assignment", time limit1. Interview
< 10 files, no CI, no Docker2. Hackathon
.github/workflows/, 10-25 deps3. MVP
Module boundaries, Redis, background jobs4. Growth
K8s/Terraform, DDD structure, monorepo5. Enterprise
CONTRIBUTING.md, LICENSE, minimal deps6. Open Source

If confidence is low, ask the user:

AskUserQuestion(questions=[{
  "question": "What kind of project is this?",
  "header": "Project tier",
  "options": [
    {"label": "Interview / take-home", "description": "8-15 files, 200-600 LOC, simple architecture", "markdown": "```\nTier 1: Interview / Take-Home\n─────────────────────────────\nFiles:    8-15 max\nLOC:      200-600\nArch:     Flat structure, no abstractions\nPatterns: Direct imports, inline logic\nTests:    Unit only, co-located\n```"},
    {"label": "Startup / MVP", "description": "MVC monolith, managed services, ship fast", "markdown": "```\nTier 3: Startup / MVP\n─────────────────────\nArch:     MVC monolith\nDB:       Managed (RDS/Supabase)\nCI:       GitHub Actions (1-2 workflows)\nPatterns: Service layer, repository pattern\nDeploy:   Vercel / Railway / Fly.io\n```"},
    {"label": "Growth / enterprise", "description": "Modular monolith or DDD, full observability", "markdown": "```\nTier 4-5: Growth / Enterprise\n─────────────────────────────\nArch:     Modular monolith or DDD\nInfra:    K8s, Terraform, Redis, queues\nCI:       Multi-stage pipelines\nPatterns: Hexagonal, CQRS, event-driven\nObserve:  Structured logging, tracing\n```"},
    {"label": "Open source library", "description": "Minimal API surface, exhaustive tests", "markdown": "```\nTier 6: Open Source Library\n──────────────────────────\nAPI:      Minimal public surface\nTests:    100% coverage, property-based\nDocs:     README, API docs, examples\nCI:       Matrix builds, release automation\nPatterns: Semver, CONTRIBUTING.md\n```"}
  ],
  "multiSelect": false
}])

Pass the detected tier as context to ALL downstream agents and phases. The tier constrains which patterns are appropriate — see scope-appropriate-architecture skill for the full matrix.

Override: User can always override the detected tier. Warn them of trade-offs if they choose a higher tier than detected.


STEP 0a: Verify User Intent with AskUserQuestion

Clarify brainstorming constraints:

AskUserQuestion(
  questions=[
    {
      "question": "What type of design exploration?",
      "header": "Type",
      "options": [
        {"label": "Open exploration (Recommended)", "description": "Generate 10+ ideas, evaluate all, synthesize top 3", "markdown": "```\nOpen Exploration (7 phases)\n──────────────────────────\n  Diverge        Evaluate       Synthesize\n  ┌─────┐       ┌─────┐       ┌─────┐\n  │ 10+ │──────▶│Rate │──────▶│Top 3│\n  │ideas│       │0-10 │       │picks│\n  └─────┘       └─────┘       └─────┘\n  3-5 agents    Devil's        Trade-off\n  in parallel   advocate       table\n```"},
        {"label": "Constrained design", "description": "I have specific requirements to work within", "markdown": "```\nConstrained Design\n──────────────────\n  Requirements ──▶ Feasibility ──▶ Design\n  ┌──────────┐    ┌──────────┐    ┌──────┐\n  │ Fixed    │    │ Check    │    │ Best │\n  │ bounds   │    │ fit      │    │ fit  │\n  └──────────┘    └──────────┘    └──────┘\n  Skip divergent phase, focus on\n  feasibility within constraints\n```"},
        {"label": "Comparison", "description": "Compare 2-3 specific approaches I have in mind", "markdown": "```\nComparison Mode\n───────────────\n  Approach A ──┐\n  Approach B ──┼──▶ Rate 0-10 ──▶ Winner\n  Approach C ──┘    (6 dims)\n\n  Skip ideation, jump straight\n  to evaluation + trade-off table\n```"},
        {"label": "Quick ideation", "description": "Generate ideas fast, skip deep evaluation", "markdown": "```\nQuick Ideation\n──────────────\n  Braindump ──▶ Light filter ──▶ List\n  ┌────────┐   ┌────────────┐   ┌────┐\n  │ 10+    │   │ Viable?    │   │ 5-7│\n  │ ideas  │   │ Y/N only   │   │ out│\n  └────────┘   └────────────┘   └────┘\n  Fast pass, no deep scoring\n```"},
        {"label": "Plan first", "description": "Structured exploration before generating ideas", "markdown": "```\nPlan Mode Exploration\n─────────────────────\n  1. EnterPlanMode($TOPIC)\n  2. Analyze constraints\n  3. Research precedents\n  4. Map solution space\n  5. ExitPlanMode → options\n  6. User picks direction\n  7. Deep dive on chosen path\n\n  Best for: Architecture,\n  design systems, trade-offs\n```"}
      ],
      "multiSelect": false
    },
    {
      "question": "Any preferences or constraints?",
      "header": "Constraints",
      "options": [
        {"label": "None", "description": "Explore all possibilities"},
        {"label": "Use existing patterns", "description": "Prefer patterns already in codebase"},
        {"label": "Minimize complexity", "description": "Favor simpler solutions"},
        {"label": "I'll specify", "description": "Let me provide specific constraints"}
      ],
      "multiSelect": false
    }
  ]
)

If 'Plan first' selected:

# 1. Enter read-only plan mode
EnterPlanMode("Brainstorm exploration: $TOPIC")

# 2. Research phase — Read/Grep/Glob ONLY, no Write/Edit
#    - Scan existing codebase for related patterns
#    - Search for prior decisions on this topic (memory graph)
#    - Identify constraints, dependencies, and trade-offs

# 3. Produce structured exploration plan:
#    - Key questions to answer
#    - Dimensions to explore
#    - Agents to spawn and their focus areas
#    - Evaluation criteria

# 4. Exit plan mode — returns plan for user approval
ExitPlanMode()

# 5. User reviews. If approved → continue to Phase 1 with plan as input.

Based on answers, adjust workflow:

  • Open exploration: Full 7-phase process with all agents
  • Constrained design: Skip divergent phase, focus on feasibility
  • Comparison: Skip ideation, jump to evaluation phase
  • Quick ideation: Generate ideas, skip deep evaluation

STEP 0b: Select Orchestration Mode (skip for Tier 1-2)

Choose Agent Teams (mesh — agents debate and challenge ideas) or Task tool (star — all report to lead):

  1. CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS=1Agent Teams mode
  2. Agent Teams unavailable → Task tool mode (default)
  3. Otherwise: Open exploration with 3+ agents → recommend Agent Teams (real-time debate produces better ideas); Quick ideation → Task tool
AspectTask ToolAgent Teams
Idea generationEach agent generates independentlyAgents riff on each other's ideas
Devil's advocateLead challenges after all completeAgents challenge each other in real-time
Cost~150K tokens~400K tokens
Best forQuick ideation, constrained designOpen exploration, deep evaluation

Fallback: If Agent Teams encounters issues, fall back to Task tool for remaining phases.


STEP 0c: Effort-Aware Phase Scaling (CC 2.1.76)

Read the /effort setting to scale brainstorm depth. The effort-aware context budgeting hook (global) detects effort level automatically — adapt the phase plan accordingly:

Effort LevelPhases RunToken BudgetAgents
lowPhase 0 → Phase 2 (quick ideation) → Phase 5 (light synthesis)~50K2 max
mediumPhase 0 → Phase 2 → Phase 3 → Phase 5 → Phase 6~150K3 max
high (default)All 7 phases~400K3-5
# Effort detection — the global hook injects effort level, but also check:
# If user said "quick brainstorm" or "just ideas" → treat as low effort
# If user selected "Quick ideation" in Step 0a → treat as low effort regardless of /effort

Override: Explicit user selection in Step 0a (e.g., "Open exploration") overrides /effort downscaling.


CRITICAL: Task Management is MANDATORY (CC 2.1.16)

# Create main task IMMEDIATELY
TaskCreate(
  subject="Brainstorm: {topic}",
  description="Design exploration with parallel agent research",
  activeForm="Brainstorming {topic}"
)

# Create subtasks for each phase
TaskCreate(subject="Analyze topic and select agents", activeForm="Analyzing topic")
TaskCreate(subject="Search memory for past decisions", activeForm="Searching knowledge graph")
TaskCreate(subject="Generate divergent ideas (10+)", activeForm="Generating ideas")
TaskCreate(subject="Feasibility fast-check", activeForm="Checking feasibility")
TaskCreate(subject="Evaluate with devil's advocate", activeForm="Evaluating ideas")
TaskCreate(subject="Synthesize top approaches", activeForm="Synthesizing approaches")
TaskCreate(subject="Present design options", activeForm="Presenting options")

The Seven-Phase Process

PhaseActivitiesOutput
0. Topic AnalysisClassify keywords, select 3-5 agentsAgent list
1. Memory + ContextSearch graph, check codebasePrior patterns
2. Divergent ExplorationGenerate 10+ ideas WITHOUT filteringIdea pool
3. Feasibility Fast-Check30-second viability per idea, including testabilityFiltered ideas
4. Evaluation & RatingRate 0-10 (6 dimensions incl. testability), devil's advocateRanked ideas
5. SynthesisFilter to top 2-3, trade-off table, test strategy per approachOptions
6. Design PresentationPresent in 200-300 word sections, include test planValidated design

Progressive Output (CC 2.1.76)

Output results incrementally after each phase — don't batch everything until the end:

After PhaseShow User
0. Topic AnalysisSelected agents, tier classification
1. Memory + ContextPrior decisions, relevant patterns
2. Divergent ExplorationEach agent's ideas as they return (don't wait for all)
3. FeasibilityFiltered viable ideas with pass/fail
4. EvaluationTop-rated ideas with scores

For Phase 2 parallel agents, output each agent's ideas as soon as it returns — don't wait for all agents. This lets users see early ideas and redirect the exploration if needed. Showing ideas incrementally also helps users build a mental model of the solution space faster than a final dump.

Load the phase workflow for detailed instructions:

Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/phase-workflow.md")

When NOT to Use

Skip brainstorming when:

  • Requirements are crystal clear and specific
  • Only one obvious approach exists
  • User has already designed the solution
  • Time-sensitive bug fix or urgent issue

Quick Reference: Agent Selection

Topic ExampleAgents to Spawn
"brainstorm API for users"workflow-architect, backend-system-architect, security-auditor, test-generator
"brainstorm dashboard UI"workflow-architect, frontend-ui-developer, test-generator
"brainstorm RAG pipeline"workflow-architect, llm-integrator, data-pipeline-engineer, test-generator
"brainstorm caching strategy"workflow-architect, backend-system-architect, frontend-performance-engineer, test-generator
"brainstorm design system"workflow-architect, frontend-ui-developer, design-context-extractor, component-curator, test-generator
"brainstorm event sourcing"workflow-architect, event-driven-architect, backend-system-architect, test-generator
"brainstorm pricing strategy"workflow-architect, product-strategist, web-research-analyst, test-generator
"brainstorm deploy pipeline"workflow-architect, infrastructure-architect, ci-cd-engineer, test-generator

Always include: workflow-architect for system design perspective, test-generator for testability assessment.


Agent Teams Alternative: Brainstorming Team

In Agent Teams mode, form a brainstorming team where agents debate ideas in real-time. Dynamically select teammates based on topic analysis (Phase 0):

TeamCreate(team_name="brainstorm-{topic-slug}", description="Brainstorm {topic}")

# Always include the system design lead
Agent(subagent_type="workflow-architect", name="system-designer",
     team_name="brainstorm-{topic-slug}",
     prompt="""You are the system design lead for brainstorming: {topic}
     DIVERGENT MODE: Generate 3-4 architectural approaches.
     When other teammates share ideas, build on them or propose alternatives.
     Challenge ideas that seem over-engineered — advocate for simplicity.
     After divergent phase, help synthesize the top approaches.""")

# Domain-specific teammates (select 2-3 based on topic keywords)
Agent(subagent_type="backend-system-architect", name="backend-thinker",
     team_name="brainstorm-{topic-slug}",
     prompt="""Brainstorm backend approaches for: {topic}
     DIVERGENT MODE: Generate 3-4 backend-specific ideas.
     When system-designer shares architectural ideas, propose concrete API designs.
     Challenge ideas from other teammates with implementation reality checks.
     Play devil's advocate on complexity vs simplicity trade-offs.""")

Agent(subagent_type="frontend-ui-developer", name="frontend-thinker",
     team_name="brainstorm-{topic-slug}",
     prompt="""Brainstorm frontend approaches for: {topic}
     DIVERGENT MODE: Generate 3-4 UI/UX ideas.
     When backend-thinker proposes APIs, suggest frontend patterns that match.
     Challenge backend proposals that create poor user experiences.
     Advocate for progressive disclosure and accessibility.""")

# Always include: testability assessor
Agent(subagent_type="test-generator", name="testability-assessor",
     team_name="brainstorm-{topic-slug}",
     prompt="""Assess testability for each brainstormed approach: {topic}
     For every idea shared by teammates, evaluate:
     - Can core logic be unit tested without external services?
     - What's the mock/stub surface area?
     - Can it be integration-tested with docker-compose/testcontainers?
     Score testability 0-10 per the evaluation rubric.
     Challenge designs that score below 5 on testability.
     Propose test strategies for the top approaches in synthesis phase.""")

# Optional: Add security-auditor, llm-integrator based on topic

Key advantage: Agents riff on each other's ideas and play devil's advocate in real-time, rather than generating ideas in isolation.

Team teardown after synthesis:

# After Phase 5 synthesis and design presentation
SendMessage(type="shutdown_request", recipient="system-designer", content="Brainstorm complete")
SendMessage(type="shutdown_request", recipient="backend-thinker", content="Brainstorm complete")
SendMessage(type="shutdown_request", recipient="frontend-thinker", content="Brainstorm complete")
SendMessage(type="shutdown_request", recipient="testability-assessor", content="Brainstorm complete")
# ... shutdown any additional domain teammates
TeamDelete()

# Worktree cleanup (CC 2.1.72) — for Tier 3+ projects that entered a worktree
# If EnterWorktree was called during brainstorm (e.g., Plan first → worktree), exit it
ExitWorktree(action="keep")  # Keep branch for follow-up /ork:implement

Fallback: If team formation fails, load Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/phase-workflow.md") and use standard Phase 2 Task spawns.

Partial results (CC 2.1.76): Background agents that are killed (timeout, context limit) return responses tagged with [PARTIAL RESULT]. When collecting Phase 2 divergent ideas, check each agent's output for this tag. If present, include the partial ideas but note them as incomplete in Phase 3 feasibility. Prefer synthesizing partial results over re-spawning agents.

PostCompact recovery: Long brainstorm sessions may trigger context compaction. The PostCompact hook re-injects branch and task state. If compaction occurs mid-brainstorm, check .claude/chain/state.json for the last completed phase and resume from the next handoff file (see Phase Handoffs table).

Manual cleanup: If TeamDelete() doesn't terminate all agents, press Ctrl+F twice to force-stop remaining background agents. Note: /clear (CC 2.1.72+) preserves background agents — only foreground tasks are cleared.


Key Principles

PrincipleApplication
Dynamic agent selectionSelect agents based on topic keywords
Parallel researchLaunch 3-5 agents in ONE message
Memory-firstCheck graph for past decisions before research
Divergent-firstGenerate 10+ ideas BEFORE filtering
Task trackingUse TaskCreate/TaskUpdate for progress visibility
YAGNI ruthlesslyRemove unnecessary complexity

Related Skills

  • ork:architecture-decision-record - Document key decisions made during brainstorming
  • ork:implement - Execute the implementation plan after brainstorming completes
  • ork:explore - Deep codebase exploration to understand existing patterns
  • ork:assess - Rate quality 0-10 with dimension breakdown
  • ork:design-to-code - Convert brainstormed UI designs into components
  • ork:component-search - Find existing components before building new ones
  • ork:competitive-analysis - Porter's Five Forces, SWOT for product brainstorms

References

Load on demand with Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/<file>"):

FileContent
phase-workflow.mdDetailed 7-phase instructions
divergent-techniques.mdSCAMPER, Mind Mapping, etc.
evaluation-rubric.md0-10 scoring criteria
devils-advocate-prompts.mdChallenge templates
socratic-questions.mdRequirements discovery
common-pitfalls.mdMistakes to avoid
example-session-dashboard.mdComplete example

Version: 4.7.0 (March 2026) — Added progressive output for incremental phase results (7.9.0)

Stats
Stars128
Forks14
Last CommitMar 18, 2026
Actions

Similar Skills