Get the FREE Ultimate OpenClaw Setup Guide β†’

brainstorming

Scanned
npx machina-cli add skill vudovn/antigravity-kit/brainstorming --openclaw
Files (1)
SKILL.md
4.6 KB

Brainstorming & Communication Protocol

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


πŸ›‘ SOCRATIC GATE (ENFORCEMENT)

When to Trigger

PatternAction
"Build/Create/Make [thing]" without detailsπŸ›‘ ASK 3 questions
Complex feature or architectureπŸ›‘ Clarify before implementing
Update/change requestπŸ›‘ Confirm scope
Vague requirementsπŸ›‘ 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?
    • πŸ‘₯ Users: Who will use this?
    • πŸ“¦ Scope: Must-have vs nice-to-have?
  3. WAIT - Get response before proceeding

🧠 Dynamic Question Generation

β›” NEVER use static templates. Read dynamic-questioning.md for principles.

Core Principles

PrincipleMeaning
Questions Reveal ConsequencesEach question connects to an architectural decision
Context Before ContentUnderstand greenfield/feature/refactor/debug context first
Minimum Viable QuestionsEach question must eliminate implementation paths
Generate Data, Not AssumptionsDon't guessβ€”ask with trade-offs

Question Generation Process

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

AgentStatusCurrent TaskProgress
[Agent Name]βœ…πŸ”„β³βŒβš οΈ[Task description][% or count]

Status Icons

IconMeaningUsage
βœ…CompletedTask finished successfully
πŸ”„RunningCurrently executing
⏳WaitingBlocked, waiting for dependency
❌ErrorFailed, needs attention
⚠️WarningPotential 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

CategoryResponse Strategy
Port ConflictOffer alternative port or close existing
Dependency MissingAuto-install or ask permission
Build FailureShow specific error + suggested fix
Unclear ErrorAsk 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

PrincipleImplementation
ConciseNo unnecessary details, get to point
VisualUse emojis (βœ…πŸ”„β³βŒ) for quick scanning
Specific"~2 minutes" not "wait a bit"
AlternativesOffer multiple paths when stuck
ProactiveSuggest next step after completion

Anti-Patterns (AVOID)

Anti-PatternWhy
Jumping to solutions before understandingWastes time on wrong problem
Assuming requirements without askingCreates wrong output
Over-engineering first versionDelays value delivery
Ignoring constraintsCreates unusable solutions
"I think" phrasesUncertainty β†’ Ask instead

Source

git clone https://github.com/vudovn/antigravity-kit/blob/main/.agent/skills/brainstorming/SKILL.mdView on GitHub

Overview

Brainstorming & Communication Protocol provides a Socratic questioning flow to surface requirements, enforce scope, and improve clarity for complex requests. It mandates three questions before implementation, with progress reporting and explicit error handling to keep projects on track.

How This Skill Works

When a request is complex, vague, or involves new features, the protocol triggers the SOCRATIC GATE: STOP, ASK (minimum three questions), and WAIT for responses. It uses dynamic-questioning principles (no templates) to generate priority questions, format trade-offs, and capture decisions. Progress is reported with a transparent status board, and errors follow a pattern that acknowledges, explains, offers fixes, and asks for choices.

When to Use It

  • Complex or vague feature requests with unclear scope
  • Introducing new features or architectural changes
  • Update or change requests needing scope confirmation
  • Requests lacking purpose, users, or constraints
  • Greenfield, refactor, or debugging efforts with high impact

Quick Start

  1. Step 1: Trigger the Socratic gate for complex or vague requests
  2. Step 2: Generate and present minimum three questions using dynamic-questioning principles
  3. Step 3: Await user responses, update scope, and proceed only after alignment

Best Practices

  • Follow the mandatory three-question flow before any implementation
  • Ask purpose, users, and scope with explicit trade-offs
  • Prioritize questions: blocking (P0) > high-leverage (P1) > nice-to-have (P2)
  • Read context first and avoid static templates
  • Keep progress transparent with a status board and clear next steps

Example Use Cases

  • A product team asks for a new dashboard without data sources defined
  • An API feature is requested but requirements are underspecified
  • A tech debt refactor with unclear impact on users and performance
  • A UI update requested without accessibility and KPI specs
  • A deployment pipeline change with unknown dependencies

Frequently Asked Questions

Add this skill to your agents
Sponsor this space

Reach thousands of developers β†—