Brainstorming
Skill fusengine/agents/plugins/ai-pilot/skills/brainstorming
Redefining development through cognitive automation and collaborative agent systems.
npx -y skills add fusengine/agents --skill brainstormingAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 22 stars22 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Use when user requests creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Activates BEFORE APEX Analyze phase to refine requirements through structured questioning.
SKILL.md
4.1 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Brainstorming Skill
Design-first approach: no code before design approval.
Agent Workflow (MANDATORY)
Before ANY brainstorming session, use TeamCreate to spawn agents:
- fuse-ai-pilot:explore-codebase - Understand project context, patterns, constraints
- fuse-ai-pilot:research-expert - Fetch best practices and documentation
After design approval, transition to APEX Analyze phase, passing along the explore-codebase and research-expert findings in the handoff (not just the design doc). APEX Analyze re-runs those same agents by default — carrying forward what was already gathered here avoids re-doing the same research twice.
Overview
| Scenario | Action |
|---|---|
| New feature | Full brainstorming (6 steps) |
| Major change | Full brainstorming (6 steps) |
| Component creation | Full brainstorming (6 steps) |
| Trivial fix (1-3 lines) | Skip brainstorming, go to APEX |
| Simple rename/typo | Skip brainstorming, go to APEX |
6-Step Process
Step 1: Explore Project Context
Gather context before asking questions:
git log --oneline -20- Recent changes and direction- Existing code patterns and conventions
- Related documentation and prior decisions
- Tech stack and dependency constraints
Step 2: Ask Clarifying Questions (ONE AT A TIME)
Ask focused questions sequentially. Wait for each answer before the next.
Categories: purpose, constraints, success criteria, users, integrations.
See workflow.md for question categories
Step 3: Diverge, Then Converge to 2-3 Approaches
Generate ≥6-8 distinct approaches via a named technique (SCAMPER / reverse-brainstorming / analogies), judgment suspended — not 3 sizes of the same idea. Only then converge to 2-3 with trade-offs in table format:
| Approach | Pros | Cons | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Option A | ... | ... | ... |
| Option B | ... | ... | ... |
| Option C | ... | ... | ... |
Always include a clear recommendation with rationale.
Step 4: Present Design for Approval
Break design into digestible sections:
- Architecture overview
- Key components and responsibilities
- Data flow and state management
- Edge cases and error handling
Wait for explicit user approval before proceeding.
Step 5: Save Design Document
Save approved design to: docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md
Step 6: Transition to APEX
Hand off to APEX Analyze phase with the approved design as input.
Reference Guide
| Topic | Reference | When to Consult |
|---|---|---|
| Workflow | workflow.md | Question categories, proposal format, design template |
| Anti-Patterns | anti-patterns.md | Catching rationalizations to skip brainstorming |
Quick Reference
1. Explore → git log, codebase, docs (agents in parallel)
2. Question → ONE AT A TIME, wait for answers
3. Diverge → 6-8 options (named technique), converge to 2-3 with trade-offs table
4. Design → Present sections, get approval
5. Save → docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md
6. Handoff → APEX Analyze with approved design + prior research (no re-research)
Critical Rules
- NEVER write code before design approval - Design first, always
- Ask questions ONE AT A TIME - Never dump a list of 10 questions
- Always propose alternatives - Minimum 2 approaches with trade-offs
- Save the design doc - Creates audit trail and shared reference
- Get explicit approval - "Looks good" or similar before proceeding