Brainstorm

Brainstorm

Evaluate the current codebase and generate actionable suggestions that the user can take into /feature-interview for human/agent alignment, planning-destination triage, and follow-up specification or roadmap work.

Process

0. Product-Path Scope Resolution

Resolve research scope by product path before using code or app structure as a hint:

1. If $ARGUMENTS names a non-archived research/{slug}/ directory or a product-path ID whose scope_path points there, use that path. Treat {slug} as the product/app name, not the ICP, audience, or segment label.
2. If $ARGUMENTS names only research/_archive/{slug}/ or a manifest entry with status: archived or legacy status: abandoned, stop and warn that the path is archived; do not write or update scoped outputs there.
3. Read research/.progress.yaml when present. Normalize legacy active_path to active_paths on read and write back active_paths on manifest updates. Treat legacy abandoned as archived; exclude archived, abandoned, deferred, revisit_candidate, promoted, and any scope_path under research/_archive/ from active target selection.
4. If active product paths exist in the manifest, use those paths. If multiple active paths exist, ask which one to target unless this skill explicitly supports cross-path output.
5. If no active manifest target exists, list non-archived product directories under research/, excluding research/_archive/ and dot directories. Auto-select only when exactly one exists; ask when multiple exist.
6. If no product directories exist, use flat research/ single-product mode.
7. Detect monorepo/app/package structure only as a secondary hint. Suggest creating a missing research/{slug}/ product path when code clearly exposes an app, but do not require code or monorepo detection before using research/{slug}/.

When product path {slug} is active, read and write research under research/{slug}/, specs under specs/{slug}/, and treat top-level research/*.md files as flat-mode documents or cross-path summaries.

1. Understand the project: Read CLAUDE.md, README, package config, and key source files to understand what the project does, its architecture, tech stack, and current state.

2. Check existing plans and research: Read tasks/roadmap.md, tasks/todo.md, tasks/manual-todo.md, tasks/record-todo.md, tasks/recurring-todo.md (when they exist), and specs from specs/ (or spec.md) if they exist to understand work already planned, in progress, or deferred as advisory records — avoid suggesting things already covered. Read research/competitive-analysis.md (or research/{slug}/competitive-analysis.md) if it exists — competitor gaps, market white space, and positioning weaknesses are high-signal inputs for ideation. Read research/customer-feedback.md (or research/{slug}/customer-feedback.md) if it exists — "Wrong" and "New" findings are highest-signal ideation input (real user feedback that contradicts assumptions or reveals unmet needs). Read research/metrics.md (or research/{slug}/metrics.md) if it exists — instrumentation gaps can generate ideas for tooling or observability improvements.

3. Analyse the codebase across these dimensions:

   Strategic / Product

   • New features: Capabilities that would make the project significantly more useful or valuable to its users — think beyond what exists today
   • New workflows: End-to-end flows or automation that the project could enable but doesn't yet
   • Product line expansion: If the project's core could serve adjacent use cases, new audiences, or spin off complementary products — suggest them
   • Integration opportunities: External tools, services, platforms, or APIs that would multiply the project's value

   Improvement

   • Missing capabilities: Features the project's architecture is set up for but doesn't yet offer
   • Pain points: Rough edges, inconsistencies, or manual steps that could be automated
   • Performance opportunities: Obvious bottlenecks or low-hanging optimisations
   • Developer experience: Build times, debugging ergonomics, onboarding friction

   Hygiene

   • Technical debt: Areas where the code has outgrown its original design
   • Testing gaps: Untested critical paths or missing test infrastructure
   • Security hardening: Areas where security posture could be improved

   Market Fit (only when research/icp.md (or research/{slug}/icp.md), research/mvp-gap.md (or research/{slug}/mvp-gap.md), or research/competitive-analysis.md (or research/{slug}/competitive-analysis.md) exist)

   • ICP alignment: Features that directly address ICP pain points but are missing or incomplete
   • Journey gaps: Steps in the user or customer journey where the product loses them
   • Unaddressed MVP gaps: Gaps from research/mvp-gap.md (or research/{slug}/mvp-gap.md) not yet tracked in roadmap or todo
   • Competitive white space: Features or capabilities that no competitor offers well — opportunities from research/competitive-analysis.md (or research/{slug}/competitive-analysis.md) market gaps
   • Competitor leapfrog: Specific competitor weaknesses you could exploit, or table-stakes features competitors have that you lack
   • Positioning plays: Ideas that would sharpen differentiation against the competitive landscape

4. Scope: If $ARGUMENTS is provided, focus the analysis on that area. Otherwise, cover all dimensions.

Output

Append the suggestions to tasks/ideas.md (do not overwrite existing content). Also display them to the user. When product-path scope is active, prefix each suggestion with the app name.

Present suggestions grouped by effort level, with each suggestion framed as a topic ready to hand to /feature-interview:

Quick wins (hours)

• Suggestion title — One-line description of what and why. Start with: /feature-interview <topic>

Medium efforts (days)

• Suggestion title — One-line description of what and why. Start with: /feature-interview <topic>

Larger initiatives (weeks)

• Suggestion title — One-line description of what and why. Start with: /feature-interview <topic>

Constraints

• Each suggestion must be specific and actionable — not vague aspirations like "improve testing."
• Include the concrete signal from the codebase that motivates each suggestion (file, pattern, or metric).
• Provide the /feature-interview <topic> prompt the user can copy-paste to kick off planning.
• Limit to 3–5 suggestions per effort level to avoid overwhelming the user.
• Do not suggest changes that conflict with patterns established in CLAUDE.md.
• Do not repeat work already tracked in tasks/roadmap.md, tasks/todo.md, tasks/manual-todo.md, tasks/record-todo.md, tasks/recurring-todo.md, or specs/ (or specs/{slug}/).

Context Gathering

Step 1 — Scope questions. Before researching, ask the user 1–3 questions via AskUserQuestion to understand: their product/service, target audience, and what they hope to learn or decide from this research.

Step 2 — Research. Conduct research scoped by the user's answers.

Step 3 — Findings validation. Before building the alignment page, present the 3–5 most important findings and ask the user to validate or correct any critical assumptions.

Alignment Page

By default, this skill reports results inline and writes only its normal durable artifacts (for example tasks/*.md, reports, queues, benchmark notes, status docs, or other skill-specific files). Do not build an alignment page automatically. Create alignment/brainstorm-{topic}.html only when the user explicitly requests an alignment page or when you explicitly identify a concrete clarification/review need that cannot be handled cleanly inline; when you create one, follow ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md in this skill's directory.

Default Shipping Contract

Follow the shared shipping contract convention in CLAUDE.md.