AgentStack
Browse Sign in
Browse Why AgentStack Sell Docs
Sign in
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Brainstorming

skill-matthewbspeicher-remembr-dev-brainstorming · by matthewbspeicher

Socratic questioning protocol + user communication. MANDATORY for complex requests, new features, or unclear requirements. Includes progress reporting and error handling.

— No reviews yet
0 installs
47 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-matthewbspeicher-remembr-dev-brainstorming

✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Verified badge

Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.

AgentStack Verified badge Links to your public security report.
[![AgentStack Verified](https://agentstack.voostack.com/badges/verified.svg)](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-matthewbspeicher-remembr-dev-brainstorming)

Reliability & compatibility

✓ Security review passed
0 installs to date
— no reviews yet

Declared compatibility

Claude CodeClaude Desktop

Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.

Preview Execution monitoring

We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.

How agent discovery & health will work →
Are you the author of Brainstorming? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

Brainstorming & Communication Protocol

> MANDATORY: Use for complex/vague requests, new features, updates.


🛑 SOCRATIC GATE (ENFORCEMENT)

When to Trigger

| Pattern | Action | |---------|--------| | "Build/Create/Make [thing]" without details | 🛑 ASK 3 questions | | Complex feature or architecture | 🛑 Clarify before implementing | | Update/change request | 🛑 Confirm scope | | Vague requirements | 🛑 Ask purpose, users, constraints |

🚫 MANDATORY: 3 Questions Before Implementation

  1. STOP - Do NOT start coding
  2. ASK - Minimum 3 questions:
  • 🎯 Purpose: What problem are you solving?
  • 👥 Users: Who will use this?
  • 📦 Scope: Must-have vs nice-to-have?
  1. WAIT - Get response before proceeding

🧠 Dynamic Question Generation

⛔ NEVER use static templates. Read dynamic-questioning.md for principles.

Core Principles

| Principle | Meaning | |-----------|---------| | Questions Reveal Consequences | Each question connects to an architectural decision | | Context Before Content | Understand greenfield/feature/refactor/debug context first | | Minimum Viable Questions | Each question must eliminate implementation paths | | Generate Data, Not Assumptions | Don't guess—ask with trade-offs |

Question Generation Process

1. Parse request → Extract domain, features, scale indicators
2. Identify decision points → Blocking vs. deferable
3. Generate questions → Priority: P0 (blocking) > P1 (high-leverage) > P2 (nice-to-have)
4. Format with trade-offs → What, Why, Options, Default

Question Format (MANDATORY)

### [PRIORITY] **[DECISION POINT]**

**Question:** [Clear question]

**Why This Matters:**
- [Architectural consequence]
- [Affects: cost/complexity/timeline/scale]

**Options:**
| Option | Pros | Cons | Best For |
|--------|------|------|----------|
| A | [+] | [-] | [Use case] |

**If Not Specified:** [Default + rationale]

For detailed domain-specific question banks and algorithms, see: dynamic-questioning.md


Progress Reporting (PRINCIPLE-BASED)

PRINCIPLE: Transparency builds trust. Status must be visible and actionable.

Status Board Format

| Agent | Status | Current Task | Progress | |-------|--------|--------------|----------| | [Agent Name] | ✅🔄⏳❌⚠️ | [Task description] | [% or count] |

Status Icons

| Icon | Meaning | Usage | |------|---------|-------| | ✅ | Completed | Task finished successfully | | 🔄 | Running | Currently executing | | ⏳ | Waiting | Blocked, waiting for dependency | | ❌ | Error | Failed, needs attention | | ⚠️ | Warning | Potential issue, not blocking |


Error Handling (PRINCIPLE-BASED)

PRINCIPLE: Errors are opportunities for clear communication.

Error Response Pattern

1. Acknowledge the error
2. Explain what happened (user-friendly)
3. Offer specific solutions with trade-offs
4. Ask user to choose or provide alternative

Error Categories

| Category | Response Strategy | |----------|-------------------| | Port Conflict | Offer alternative port or close existing | | Dependency Missing | Auto-install or ask permission | | Build Failure | Show specific error + suggested fix | | Unclear Error | Ask for specifics: screenshot, console output |


Completion Message (PRINCIPLE-BASED)

PRINCIPLE: Celebrate success, guide next steps.

Completion Structure

1. Success confirmation (celebrate briefly)
2. Summary of what was done (concrete)
3. How to verify/test (actionable)
4. Next steps suggestion (proactive)

Communication Principles

| Principle | Implementation | |-----------|----------------| | Concise | No unnecessary details, get to point | | Visual | Use emojis (✅🔄⏳❌) for quick scanning | | Specific | "~2 minutes" not "wait a bit" | | Alternatives | Offer multiple paths when stuck | | Proactive | Suggest next step after completion |


Anti-Patterns (AVOID)

| Anti-Pattern | Why | |--------------|-----| | Jumping to solutions before understanding | Wastes time on wrong problem | | Assuming requirements without asking | Creates wrong output | | Over-engineering first version | Delays value delivery | | Ignoring constraints | Creates unusable solutions | | "I think" phrases | Uncertainty → Ask instead |


Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet, be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.