.wrangler/memory/knowledge-base/reference-prompts/skills/brainstorming/SKILL.md
Use when creating or developing anything, before writing code or implementation plans - refines rough ideas into fully-formed designs through structured Socratic questioning, alternative exploration, and incremental validation
npx skillsauth add bacchus-labs/wrangler brainstormingInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Transform rough ideas into fully-formed designs through structured questioning and alternative exploration.
Core principle: Research first, ask targeted questions to fill gaps, explore alternatives, present design incrementally for validation.
| Phase | Key Activities | Tool Usage | Output | |-------|---------------|------------|--------| | Prep: Autonomous Recon | Inspect repo/docs/commits, form initial model | Native tools (ls, cat, git log, etc.) | Draft understanding to confirm | | 1. Understanding | Share findings, ask only for missing context | AskUserQuestion for real decisions | Purpose, constraints, criteria (confirmed) | | 2. Exploration | Propose 2-3 approaches | AskUserQuestion for approach selection | Architecture options with trade-offs | | 3. Design Presentation | Present in 200-300 word sections | Open-ended questions | Complete design with validation | | 4. Design Documentation | Write design document | writing-clearly-and-concisely skill | Design doc in .wrangler/plans/ | | 5. Worktree Setup | Set up isolated workspace | using-git-worktrees skill | Ready development environment | | 6. Planning Handoff | Create implementation plan | writing-plans skill | Detailed task breakdown |
Copy this checklist to track progress:
Brainstorming Progress:
- [ ] Prep: Autonomous Recon (repo/docs/commits reviewed, initial model shared)
- [ ] Phase 1: Understanding (purpose, constraints, criteria gathered)
- [ ] Phase 2: Exploration (2-3 approaches proposed and evaluated)
- [ ] Phase 3: Design Presentation (design validated in sections)
- [ ] Phase 4: Design Documentation (design written to .wrangler/plans/)
- [ ] Phase 5: Worktree Setup (optional - for isolation)
- [ ] Phase 6: Planning Handoff (if implementing)
Example summary + targeted question:
Based on the README and yesterday's commit, we're expanding localization to dashboard and billing emails; admin console is still untouched. Only gap I see is whether support responses need localization in this iteration. Did I miss anything important?
Example using AskUserQuestion:
Question: "Which architectural approach should we use?"
Options:
- "Direct API calls with retry logic" (simple, synchronous, easier to debug) ← recommended for current scope
- "Event-driven with message queue" (scalable, complex setup, eventual consistency)
- "Hybrid with background jobs" (balanced, moderate complexity, best of both)
I recommend the direct API approach because it matches existing patterns and minimizes new infrastructure. Let me know if you see a blocker that pushes us toward the other options.
After validating the design, write it to a permanent document:
.wrangler/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md (use actual date and descriptive topic)When design is approved and implementation will follow:
Ask: "Ready to create the implementation plan?"
When your human partner confirms (any affirmative response):
Use AskUserQuestion when:
Best practices:
Use open-ended questions for:
Frame them to confirm or expand your current understanding rather than reopening settled topics.
Example decision flow:
digraph revisit_phases {
rankdir=LR;
"New constraint revealed?" [shape=diamond];
"Partner questions approach?" [shape=diamond];
"Requirements unclear?" [shape=diamond];
"Return to Phase 1" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ffcccc"];
"Return to Phase 2" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ffffcc"];
"Continue forward" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ccffcc"];
"New constraint revealed?" -> "Return to Phase 1" [label="yes"];
"New constraint revealed?" -> "Partner questions approach?" [label="no"];
"Partner questions approach?" -> "Return to Phase 2" [label="yes"];
"Partner questions approach?" -> "Requirements unclear?" [label="no"];
"Requirements unclear?" -> "Return to Phase 1" [label="yes"];
"Requirements unclear?" -> "Continue forward" [label="no"];
}
You can and should go backward when:
Avoid forcing forward linearly when going backward would give better results.
| Principle | Application | |-----------|-------------| | One question at a time | Phase 1: Single targeted question only for gaps you can’t close yourself | | Structured choices | Use AskUserQuestion tool for 2-4 options with trade-offs | | YAGNI ruthlessly | Remove unnecessary features from all designs | | Explore alternatives | Always propose 2-3 approaches before settling | | Incremental validation | Present design in sections, validate each | | Flexible progression | Go backward when needed - flexibility > rigidity | | Own the initiative | Recommend priorities and next steps; ask if you should proceed only when requirements conflict | | Announce usage | State skill usage at start of session |
tools
Use when creating technical specifications for features, systems, or architectural designs. Creates comprehensive specification documents using the Wrangler MCP issue management system with proper structure and completeness checks.
testing
Creates and refines agent skills using TDD methodology with pressure testing and rationalization detection. Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, testing skills with pressure scenarios, or verifying skills work before deployment.
tools
Use when design is complete and you need detailed implementation tasks - creates tracked MCP issues with exact file paths, complete code examples, and verification steps. Optional reference plan file for architecture overview.
development
Validates governance file completeness, format compliance, and metric accuracy. Use when auditing governance health, after bulk changes, or ensuring documentation integrity.