Dream Solution Space
Dream is structured divergence. It creates competing perspectives, attacks them with different value systems, and recommends the approach that survives.
Use before non-trivial decisions, architecture choices, product directions, writing angles, research plans, or build strategies.
1. Ground in reality
Before ideating, gather:
- Current context
- Existing constraints
- Prior attempts
- User's real goal
- Available resources
- Things that must not happen
A dream that ignores reality is just a fantasy.
2. Generate three perspectives
Minimalist
Find the smallest move that could work.
Ask:
- Can we delete our way to the answer?
- Can we use an existing tool?
- What is the 20-line version?
- What if we do not build this?
Maximalist
Find the version worth being proud of later.
Ask:
- What would the ideal system look like?
- What does this unlock beyond the immediate ask?
- What edge cases should be handled from day one?
- What future would this make possible?
Pragmatist
Find the 80/20 move.
Ask:
- What solves the real problem this week?
- What can be deferred without creating debt?
- What is the upgrade path?
- What is the smallest meaningful proof?
3. Stress-test each perspective
Run four lenses:
- Architect: fragility, coupling, future migration, structural debt
- User: whether it solves the lived problem without extra pain
- Adversary: edge cases, abuse, wrong assumptions, failure modes
- Operator: shipping, maintenance, monitoring, rollback, ongoing burden
Each lens should produce specific concerns, not vibes.
4. Score integrity
For each perspective:
0.8-1.0: antifragile, stronger after critique0.6-0.79: viable, needs fixes<0.6: shattered, do not pursue as-is
The winner is not the prettiest idea. It is the one that survives attack.
5. Reframe if everything shatters
If all approaches fail:
- State why each failed.
- Ask whether the original problem frame is wrong.
- Generate 1-2 reframings.
- Run the perspectives once more.
If the reframes also shatter, stop and ask for human decomposition.
6. Output
Return:
- Context
- Three perspectives
- Council critique
- Integrity scores
- Shattered options and why
- Recommendation
- Next action
If two options are close, propose a hybrid only if the hybrid does not inherit both failure modes.
1---2name: dream-solution-space3description: Expand a problem's solution space before committing. Use when the user asks to "dream", "brainstorm deeply", "find a better frame", "generate competing approaches", "stress test options", or when the obvious answer feels too easy. Produces grounded perspectives, adversarial critique, integrity scores, and a recommendation.4---56# Dream Solution Space78Dream is structured divergence. It creates competing perspectives, attacks them with different value systems, and recommends the approach that survives.910Use before non-trivial decisions, architecture choices, product directions, writing angles, research plans, or build strategies.1112## 1. Ground in reality1314Before ideating, gather:1516- Current context17- Existing constraints18- Prior attempts19- User's real goal20- Available resources21- Things that must not happen2223A dream that ignores reality is just a fantasy.2425## 2. Generate three perspectives2627### Minimalist2829Find the smallest move that could work.3031Ask:3233- Can we delete our way to the answer?34- Can we use an existing tool?35- What is the 20-line version?36- What if we do not build this?3738### Maximalist3940Find the version worth being proud of later.4142Ask:4344- What would the ideal system look like?45- What does this unlock beyond the immediate ask?46- What edge cases should be handled from day one?47- What future would this make possible?4849### Pragmatist5051Find the 80/20 move.5253Ask:5455- What solves the real problem this week?56- What can be deferred without creating debt?57- What is the upgrade path?58- What is the smallest meaningful proof?5960## 3. Stress-test each perspective6162Run four lenses:6364- **Architect:** fragility, coupling, future migration, structural debt65- **User:** whether it solves the lived problem without extra pain66- **Adversary:** edge cases, abuse, wrong assumptions, failure modes67- **Operator:** shipping, maintenance, monitoring, rollback, ongoing burden6869Each lens should produce specific concerns, not vibes.7071## 4. Score integrity7273For each perspective:7475- `0.8-1.0`: antifragile, stronger after critique76- `0.6-0.79`: viable, needs fixes77- `<0.6`: shattered, do not pursue as-is7879The winner is not the prettiest idea. It is the one that survives attack.8081## 5. Reframe if everything shatters8283If all approaches fail:84851. State why each failed.862. Ask whether the original problem frame is wrong.873. Generate 1-2 reframings.884. Run the perspectives once more.8990If the reframes also shatter, stop and ask for human decomposition.9192## 6. Output9394Return:9596- Context97- Three perspectives98- Council critique99- Integrity scores100- Shattered options and why101- Recommendation102- Next action103104If two options are close, propose a hybrid only if the hybrid does not inherit both failure modes.
ariaxhan