Claude Code Plugins

Community-maintained marketplace

Feedback

project-brainstorming

@athola/claude-night-market
83
0

Socratic questioning and ideation methodology for project conception using structured brainstorming frameworks

Install Skill

1Download skill
2Enable skills in Claude

Open claude.ai/settings/capabilities and find the "Skills" section

3Upload to Claude

Click "Upload skill" and select the downloaded ZIP file

Note: Please verify skill by going through its instructions before using it.

SKILL.md

name project-brainstorming
description Socratic questioning and ideation methodology for project conception using structured brainstorming frameworks
model_preference claude-sonnet-4

Project Brainstorming Skill

Guide project ideation through Socratic questioning, constraint analysis, and structured exploration.

When to Use

  • Starting a new project without clear requirements
  • Exploring problem space before specification
  • Need to compare multiple approaches systematically
  • Validating project feasibility and scope

Integration

With superpowers:

  • Delegates to Skill(superpowers:brainstorming) for Socratic method
  • Augments with project-specific patterns
  • Uses project brainstorm templates

Without superpowers:

  • Standalone questioning framework
  • Project-focused ideation patterns
  • Structured output templates

Brainstorming Framework

Phase 1: Problem Definition

Socratic Questions:

  1. What problem are you solving?
  2. Who experiences this problem?
  3. What makes this problem worth solving now?
  4. What happens if this problem isn't solved?
  5. What existing solutions have been tried?

Output: Problem statement in docs/project-brief.md

Template:

## Problem Statement

**Who**: [Target users/stakeholders]
**What**: [The problem they face]
**Where**: [Context where problem occurs]
**When**: [Frequency/timing of problem]
**Why**: [Impact of the problem]
**Current State**: [Existing solutions and limitations]

Phase 2: Constraint Discovery

Questions:

  1. What are non-negotiable technical constraints?
  2. What are resource constraints (time, budget, team)?
  3. What integration points are required?
  4. What compliance/regulatory requirements apply?
  5. What are success criteria and failure modes?

Output: Constraints matrix

Template:

## Constraints

### Technical
- [Constraint 1 with rationale]
- [Constraint 2 with rationale]

### Resources
- **Timeline**: [Duration with milestones]
- **Team**: [Size and skills]
- **Budget**: [If applicable]

### Integration
- [Required system 1]
- [Required system 2]

### Compliance
- [Requirement 1]
- [Requirement 2]

### Success Criteria
- [ ] [Measurable criterion 1]
- [ ] [Measurable criterion 2]

Phase 3: Approach Generation

Technique: Generate 3-5 distinct approaches

For each approach:

  • Clear description (1-2 sentences)
  • Technology stack
  • Pros (3-5 points)
  • Cons (3-5 points)
  • Risks (2-3 points)
  • Estimated effort
  • Trade-offs

Template:

## Approach [N]: [Name]

**Description**: [Clear 1-2 sentence description]

**Stack**: [Technologies and tools]

**Pros**:
- [Advantage 1]
- [Advantage 2]
- [Advantage 3]

**Cons**:
- [Disadvantage 1]
- [Disadvantage 2]
- [Disadvantage 3]

**Risks**:
- [Risk 1 with likelihood]
- [Risk 2 with likelihood]

**Effort**: [S/M/L/XL or time estimate]

**Trade-offs**:
- [Trade-off 1 with mitigation]
- [Trade-off 2 with mitigation]

Phase 4: Approach Comparison

Comparison Matrix:

Criterion Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 Approach 4
Technical Fit 🟢 High 🟡 Medium 🟡 Medium 🔴 Low
Resource Efficiency 🟡 Medium 🟢 High 🔴 Low 🟡 Medium
Time to Value 🟢 Fast 🟡 Medium 🔴 Slow 🟢 Fast
Risk Level 🟡 Medium 🟢 Low 🔴 High 🟡 Medium
Maintainability 🟢 High 🟡 Medium 🟢 High 🔴 Low

Scoring: 🟢 = Good, 🟡 = Acceptable, 🔴 = Concern

Phase 5: Decision & Rationale

Selection Criteria:

  1. Alignment with constraints (must satisfy all)
  2. Risk vs. reward balance
  3. Team capability and experience
  4. Time to value
  5. Long-term maintainability

Template:

## Selected Approach: [Approach Name] ⭐

### Rationale
[2-3 paragraphs explaining why this approach was selected]

Key decision factors:
- [Factor 1]
- [Factor 2]
- [Factor 3]

### Trade-offs Accepted
- **Trade-off 1**: [Description] → Mitigation: [Strategy]
- **Trade-off 2**: [Description] → Mitigation: [Strategy]

### Rejected Approaches
- **Approach X**: Rejected because [reason]
- **Approach Y**: Rejected because [reason]

Output: Project Brief

Final output saved to docs/project-brief.md:

# [Project Name] - Project Brief

**Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Author**: [Name]
**Status**: Draft | Approved

## Problem Statement
[From Phase 1]

## Goals
1. [Primary goal]
2. [Secondary goal]
3. [Tertiary goal]

## Constraints
[From Phase 2]

## Approach Comparison
[From Phase 3 & 4]

## Selected Approach
[From Phase 5]

## Next Steps
1. `/attune:specify` - Create detailed specification
2. `/attune:plan` - Plan architecture and tasks
3. `/attune:init` - Initialize project structure

Questioning Patterns

Socratic Method

Clarification:

  • "What do you mean by [term]?"
  • "Can you give an example?"
  • "What is the difference between X and Y?"

Probing Assumptions:

  • "What are you assuming about [aspect]?"
  • "Why do you think that assumption is valid?"
  • "What if that assumption is wrong?"

Probing Reasoning:

  • "Why do you think this approach is best?"
  • "What evidence supports this?"
  • "Are there alternative explanations?"

Questioning Viewpoints:

  • "What would [stakeholder] think about this?"
  • "What are the counterarguments?"
  • "How might this fail?"

Probing Implications:

  • "What happens if we choose this approach?"
  • "What are the long-term consequences?"
  • "What does this commit us to?"

Constraint-Based Thinking

Must Have (Non-negotiable):

  • What absolutely must be true for success?
  • What constraints cannot be changed?

Should Have (Important):

  • What would significantly increase success?
  • What preferences matter most?

Could Have (Nice to have):

  • What would be beneficial but not critical?
  • What can we defer or drop if needed?

Won't Have (Explicit exclusions):

  • What are we explicitly NOT doing?
  • What scope boundaries prevent creep?

Red Flags to Surface

During brainstorming, watch for:

  • ⚠️ Vague problem statements ("make it better")
  • ⚠️ Unclear success criteria
  • ⚠️ Hidden assumptions about users or technology
  • ⚠️ Single approach bias (not exploring alternatives)
  • ⚠️ Scope creep in requirements
  • ⚠️ Unrealistic constraints or timelines
  • ⚠️ Missing stakeholder perspectives

Session State Management

Save session to .attune/brainstorm-session.json:

{
  "session_id": "20260102-143022",
  "started_at": "2026-01-02T14:30:22Z",
  "current_phase": "approach-selection",
  "problem": {
    "statement": "...",
    "stakeholders": ["..."]
  },
  "constraints": {
    "technical": ["..."],
    "resources": {"timeline": "...", "team": "..."}
  },
  "approaches": [
    {
      "name": "...",
      "pros": ["..."],
      "cons": ["..."]
    }
  ],
  "selected_approach": null,
  "decisions": {}
}

Related Skills

  • Skill(superpowers:brainstorming) - Socratic method (if available)
  • Skill(imbue:scope-guard) - Scope creep prevention
  • Skill(attune:project-specification) - Next phase after brainstorming

Related Commands

  • /attune:brainstorm - Invoke this skill
  • /attune:specify - Next step in workflow
  • /imbue:feature-review - Worthiness assessment

Examples

See /attune:brainstorm command documentation for complete examples.