You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
git clone https://github.com/obra/superpowers.git--- name: brainstorming description: "You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation." --- # Brainstorming Ideas Into Designs Help turn ideas into fully formed designs and specs through natural collaborative dialogue. Start by understanding the current project context, then ask questions one at a time to refine the idea. Once you understand what you're building, present the design and get user approval. <HARD-GATE> Do NOT invoke any implementation skill, write any code, scaffold any project, or take any implementation action until you have presented a design and the user has approved it. This applies to EVERY project regardless of perceived simplicity. </HARD-GATE> ## Anti-Pattern: "This Is Too Simple To Need A Design" Every project goes through this process. A todo list, a single-function utility, a config change — all of them. "Simple" projects are where unexamined assumptions cause the most wasted work. The design can be short (a few sentences for truly simple projects), but you MUST present it and get approval. ## Checklist You MUST create a task for each of these items and complete them in order: 1. **Explore project context** — check files, docs, recent commits 2. **Offer the visual companion just-in-time** — NOT upfront. The first time a question would genuinely be clearer shown than described, offer it then (its own message); on approval its browser tab opens for you. If no visual question ever arises, never offer it. See the Visual Companion section below. 3. **Ask clarifying questions** — one at a time, understand purpose/constraints/success criteria 4. **Propose 2-3 approaches** — with trade-offs and your recommendation 5. **Present design** — in sections scaled to their complexity, get user approval after each section 6. **Write design doc** — save to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` and commit 7. **Spec self-review** — quick inline check for placeholders, contradictions, ambiguity, scope (see below) 8. **User reviews written spec** — ask user to review the spec file before proceeding 9. **Transition to implementation** — invoke writing-plans skill to create implementation plan ## Process Flow ```dot digraph brainstorming { "Explore project context" [shape=box]; "Ask clarifying questions" [shape=box]; "Propose 2-3 approaches" [shape=box]; "Present design sections" [shape=box]; "User approves design?" [shape=diamond]; "Write design doc" [shape=box]; "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)" [shape=box]; "User reviews spec?" [shape=diamond]; "Invoke writing-plans skill" [shape=doublecircle]; "Explore project context" -> "Ask clarifying questions"; "Ask clarifying questions" -> "Propose 2-3 approaches"; "Propose 2-3 approaches" -> "Present design sections"; "Present design sections" -> "User approves design?"; "User approves design?" -> "Present design sections" [label="no, revise"]; "User approves design?" -> "Write design doc" [label="yes"]; "Write design doc" -> "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)"; "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)" -> "User reviews spec?"; "User reviews spec?" -> "Write design doc" [label="changes requested"]; "User reviews spec?" -> "Invoke writing-plans skill" [label="approved"]; } ``` **The terminal state is invoking writing-plans.** Do NOT invoke frontend-design, mcp-builder, or any other implementation skill. The ONLY skill you invoke after brainstorming is writing-plans. ## The Process **Understanding the idea:** - Check out the current project state first (files, docs, recent commits) - Before asking detailed questions, assess scope: if the request describes multiple independent subsystems (e.g., "build a platform with chat, file storage, billing, and analytics"), flag this immediately. Don't spend questions refining details of a project that needs to be decomposed first. - If the project is too large for a single spec, help the user decompose into sub-projects: what are the independent pieces, how do they relate, what order should they be built? Then brainstorm the first sub-project through the normal design flow. Each sub-project gets its own spec → plan → implementation cycle. - For appropriately-scoped projects, ask questions one at a time to refine the idea - Prefer multiple choice questions when possible, but open-ended is fine too - Only one question per message - if a topic needs more exploration, break it into multiple questions - Focus on understanding: purpose, constraints, success criteria **Exploring approaches:** - Propose 2-3 different approaches with trade-offs - Present options conversationally with your recommendation and reasoning - Lead with your recommended option and explain why - YAGNI ruthlessly - remove unnecessary features from every approach and design **Presenting the design:** - Once you believe you understand what you're building, present the design - Scale each section to its complexity: a few sentences if straightforward, up to 200-300 words if nuanced - Ask after each section whether it looks right so far - Cover: architecture, components, data flow, error handling, testing - Be ready to go back and clarify if something doesn't make sense **Design for isolation and clarity:** - Break the system into smaller units that each have one clear purpose, communicate through well-defined interfaces, and can be understood and tested independently - For each unit, you should be able to answer: what does it do, how do you use it, and what does it depend on? - Can someone understand what a unit does without reading its internals? Can you change the internals without breaking consumers? If not, the boundaries need work. - Smaller, well-bounded units are also easier for you to work with - you reason better about code you can hold in context at once, and your edits are more reliable when files are focused. When a file grows large, that's often a signal that it's doing too much. **Working in existing codebases:** - Explore the current structure before proposing changes. Follow existing patterns. - Where existing code has problems that affect the work (e.g., a file that's grown too large, unclear boundaries, tangled responsibilities), include targeted improvements as part of the design - the way a good developer improves code they're working in. - Don't propose unrelated refactoring. Stay focused on what serves the current goal. ## After the Design **Documentation:** - Write the validated design (spec) to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` - (User preferences for spec location override this default) - Use elements-of-style:writing-clearly-and-concisely skill if available - Commit the design document to git **Spec Self-Review:** After writing the spec document, look at it with fresh eyes: 1. **Placeholder scan:** Any "TBD", "TODO", incomplete sections, or vague requirements? Fix them. 2. **Internal consistency:** Do any sections contradict each other? Does the architecture match the feature descriptions? 3. **Scope check:** Is this focused enough for a single implementation plan, or does it need decomposition? 4. **Ambiguity check:** Could any requirement be interpreted two different ways? If so, pick one and make it explicit. Fix any issues inline. No need to re-review — just fix and move on. **User Review Gate:** After the spec review loop passes, ask the user to review the written spec before proceeding: > "Spec written and committed to `<path>`. Please review it and let me know if you want to make any changes before we start writing out the implementation plan." Wait for the user's response. If they request changes, make them and re-run the spec review loop. Only proceed once the user approves. **Implementation:** - Invoke the writing-plans skill to create a detailed implementation plan - Do NOT invoke any other skill. writing-plans is the next step. ## Visual Companion A browser-based companion for showing mockups, diagrams, and visual options during brainstorming. Available as a tool — not a mode. Accepting the companion means it's available for questions that benefit from visual treatment; it does NOT mean every question goes through the browser. **Offering the companion (just-in-time):** Do NOT offer it upfront. Wait until a question would genuinely be clearer shown than told — a real mockup / layout / diagram question, not merely a UI *topic*. The first time that happens, offer it then, as its own message: > "This next part might be easier if I show you — I can put together mockups, diagrams, and comparisons in a browser tab as we go. It's still new and can be token-intensive. Want me to? I'll open it for you." **This offer MUST be its own message.** Only the offer — no clarifying question, summary, or other content. Wait for the user's response. If they accept, start the server with `--open` so their browser opens to the first screen automatically. If they decline, continue text-only and don't offer again unless they raise it. **Per-question decision:** Even after the user accepts, decide FOR EACH QUESTION whether to use the browser or the terminal. The test: **would the user understand this better by seeing it than reading it?** - **Use the browser** for content that IS visual — mockups, wireframes, layout comparisons, architecture diagrams, side-by-side visual designs - **Use the terminal** for content that is text — requirements questions, conceptual choices, tradeoff lists, A/B/C/D text options, scope decisions A question about a UI topic is not automatically a visual question. "What does personality mean in this context?" is a conceptual question — use the terminal. "Which wizard layout works better?" is a visual question — use the browser. If they agree to the companion, read the detailed guide before proceeding: `skills/brainstorming/visual-companion.md`
1. **Define the Scope:** Start by clearly stating the project or idea you’re brainstorming for (e.g., "Redesigning the customer dashboard for our project management tool"). Include any constraints or goals upfront. 2. **Break It Down:** Decompose the problem into smaller components (e.g., UI layout, user workflows, technical requirements). Use bullet points or headings to organize your thoughts. 3. **Generate Ideas:** For each component, brainstorm 5+ solutions, considering different angles (e.g., user experience, technical feasibility, business goals). Use tools like mind maps or spreadsheets to track ideas. 4. **Prioritize & Validate:** Narrow down ideas based on your constraints (e.g., time, budget) and user needs. Identify gaps or risks that need further research (e.g., "We don’t know if users prefer a dark or light theme"). 5. **Refine & Document:** Organize the output into a structured format (e.g., bullet points, tables) and highlight the top 3-5 ideas to explore further. Share with stakeholders for feedback. **Tip:** Use AI tools like Notion AI or Obsidian to capture and refine brainstorming notes in real time. For complex projects, break the brainstorming into multiple sessions to avoid burnout.
No install command available. Check the GitHub repository for manual installation instructions.
git clone https://github.com/obra/superpowers/tree/main/skills/brainstormingCopy the install command above and run it in your terminal.
Launch Claude Code, Cursor, or your preferred AI coding agent.
Use the prompt template or examples below to test the skill.
Adapt the skill to your specific use case and workflow.
Conduct a thorough brainstorming session to explore all possible angles for [PROJECT/IDEA]. Start by breaking down the core problem or opportunity into smaller components. For each component, generate at least 5 creative solutions or approaches, considering technical feasibility, user needs, and potential constraints like [CONSTRAINTS]. Prioritize ideas that align with [GOALS/OBJECTIVES] and identify any gaps or risks that need further exploration. Organize the output as a structured list with clear headings for each component.
### **Project: Redesigning the Customer Onboarding Flow for a SaaS Platform** **Core Problem:** New users struggle to complete the onboarding process, leading to a 40% drop-off rate within the first 7 days. #### **Component 1: User Onboarding Flow Structure** 1. **Progressive Disclosure:** Break the onboarding into 3-4 key steps, each unlocking the next only after completion (e.g., account setup → profile customization → first task completion). 2. **Gamification:** Introduce a progress bar with milestones (e.g., "Complete 2/5 steps to unlock feature X") and small rewards (e.g., badges, discounts). 3. **Interactive Tutorials:** Replace static guides with embedded, interactive walkthroughs (e.g., tooltips that highlight UI elements users must click). 4. **Pre-Onboarding Email Sequence:** Send 3 emails before the user’s first login with tips, FAQs, and a preview of what to expect. 5. **AI-Powered Guidance:** Use a chatbot to answer questions in real-time and suggest the next best action based on user behavior. #### **Component 2: User Needs & Pain Points** - **Pain Point:** Users don’t understand the value of the platform quickly enough. - **Solution:** Add a 30-second explainer video at the start of onboarding, showing a real user achieving a key outcome (e.g., "See how Jane saved 10 hours/week using our tool"). - **Pain Point:** Users feel overwhelmed by too many fields to fill out. - **Solution:** Reduce mandatory fields to 3-5 core ones and auto-fill the rest using data from integrations (e.g., LinkedIn, Google). #### **Component 3: Technical Feasibility & Constraints** - **Constraint:** Limited development bandwidth. - **Solution:** Focus on improving the first 2 steps of onboarding (account setup and profile customization) first, as these have the highest impact on retention. - **Constraint:** Need for A/B testing. - **Solution:** Implement a feature flag system to test different onboarding flows (e.g., with vs. without gamification) and measure impact on completion rates. #### **Gaps & Risks** - **Gap:** No data on which onboarding steps cause the most drop-offs. - **Action:** Conduct user interviews or heatmap analysis to identify friction points. - **Risk:** Adding too many features (e.g., gamification) could confuse users. - **Mitigation:** Start with a minimal viable version of gamification (e.g., just a progress bar) and expand based on user feedback. **Next Steps:** 1. Prioritize the top 3 solutions from Component 1 based on impact and feasibility. 2. Create wireframes for the revised onboarding flow. 3. Draft a user survey to validate pain points identified in Component 2.
skills-collection
Take a free 3-minute scan and get personalized AI skill recommendations.
Take free scan