选项

brainstorming

obra/superpowers obra/superpowers

引导协作对话,在实施工作开始之前,将构想转化为成熟的设计方案和技术规范。

...展开全部
7
更新时间 2026-09-03

Brainstorming 将创意转化为设计

通过自然流畅的协作对话,将创意转化为成熟的设计方案和技术规格。

首先了解当前项目的背景,然后逐一提问以完善创意。一旦明确了要构建的内容,就展示设计并获得用户认可。

反模式:“这太简单了,不需要设计”

每个项目都会经历这个过程。无论是待办事项清单、单功能工具,还是配置变更——无一例外。“简单”的项目中,未经审视的假设往往会导致最大的工作浪费。设计文档可以简短(对于真正简单的项目,几句话就够了),但你必须提交设计并获得批准。

检查清单

你必须针对以下每一项创建任务,并按顺序完成:

  1. 探索项目背景——检查文件、文档和最近的提交
  2. 适时提供可视化辅助材料——切勿提前提供。当某个问题确实通过展示比文字描述更清晰时,请在该时刻提供(以独立消息形式);经批准后,相关浏览器标签页将自动为你打开。若从未出现需要可视化展示的问题,则永远不要提供。请参阅下文“可视化辅助”部分。
  3. 提出澄清问题——一次一个,弄清目的/约束条件/成功标准
  4. 提出 2-3 种方案——附带权衡分析及您的建议
  5. 展示设计——按复杂程度分段呈现,每完成一节后征得用户认可
  6. 编写设计文档——保存至docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD--design.md并提交
  7. 规范自审——快速内联检查占位符、矛盾、歧义及范围(见下文)
  8. 用户审核已编写的需求文档——在继续之前请用户审核该文档
  9. 过渡到实现阶段——调用 writing-plans 技能来制定实现计划

流程图

有向图brainstorming {
    "探索项目背景" [shape=box];
    "提出澄清问题" [shape=box];
    "提出 2-3 种方案" [shape=box];
    "展示设计章节" [shape=box];
    "用户批准设计?" [shape=diamond];
    "编写设计文档" [shape=box];
    "规范自我审查\n(行内修正)" [shape=box];
    "用户审查规范?" [shape=diamond];
    "调用撰写计划技能" [shape=doublecircle];

    “探索项目背景” -> “提出澄清问题”;
    “提出澄清问题” -> “提出2-3种方案”;
    “提出2-3种方案” -> “展示设计章节”;
    “呈现设计章节” -> “用户批准设计吗?”;
    “用户批准设计吗?” -> “呈现设计章节” [label="否,修订"];
    “用户批准设计吗?” -> “编写设计文档” [label="是"];
    “编写设计文档” -> “规格说明书自审\n(内联修正)”;
    “规格说明书自审\n(内联修正)” -> “用户审核规格说明书?”;
    “用户审核规格说明书?” -> “编写设计文档” [label="要求修改"];
    “用户审核规格说明书?” -> “调用 writing-plans 技能” [label="已批准"];
}

终态是调用 writing-plans。切勿调用 frontend-design、mcp-builder 或任何其他实现技能。在调用brainstorming 之后,唯一应调用的技能是 writing-plans。

流程

理解核心思路:

  • 首先检查当前项目状态(文件、文档、最近的提交)
  • 在提出详细问题之前,先评估范围:如果请求描述了多个独立的子系统(例如,“构建一个包含聊天、文件存储、计费和分析功能的平台”),请立即标记出来。不要在需要先进行分解的项目上浪费时间去细化细节。
  • 如果项目规模过大,无法纳入一份规格说明书中,应协助用户将其分解为子项目:哪些是独立的组成部分?它们之间如何关联?应按什么顺序构建?然后通过常规的设计流程对第一个子项目进行头脑风暴。每个子项目都应拥有独立的规格说明 → 计划 → 实施循环。
  • 对于范围适中的项目,请逐一提问以完善构想
  • 尽可能采用多选题,但开放式问题也完全可以
  • 每条消息仅提出一个问题——如果某个主题需要进一步探讨,请将其拆分为多个问题
  • 专注于理解:目的、约束条件、成功标准

探索方案:

  • 提出2-3种不同的方案,并说明各自的利弊权衡
  • 以对话形式呈现选项,并附上您的推荐方案及理由
  • 首先提出您推荐的方案并说明理由

呈现设计:

  • 一旦你确信自己理解了要构建的内容,就呈现设计方案
  • 根据各部分的复杂程度调整篇幅:若内容简单,用几句话即可;若涉及细节,则可扩展至200-300字
  • 在每个部分介绍完毕后,询问对方目前的内容是否合理
  • 涵盖内容:架构、组件、数据流、错误处理、测试
  • 如果某些内容不够清晰,要做好回过头来澄清的准备

设计应注重隔离性和清晰度:

  • 将系统分解为更小的单元,每个单元都具有一个明确的目的,通过明晰定义的接口进行通信,并且能够独立理解和测试
  • 对于每个单元,你应该能够回答:它做什么、如何使用它,以及它依赖什么?
  • 他人是否无需了解该单元内部实现就能理解其功能?你是否可以在不影响使用者的情况下修改其内部实现?如果不能,则需要调整其边界。
  • 更小、边界明确的单元也更便于你进行开发——当你能一次性把握代码上下文时,能更清晰地分析代码;当文件内容更专注时,你的修改也更可靠。当一个文件变得庞大时,这通常意味着它承担了过多的职责。

在现有代码库中工作:

  • 在提出更改建议前,先探索当前的结构。遵循现有的模式。
  • 如果现有代码存在影响工作的缺陷(例如:文件过大、边界不清、职责交织),请将有针对性的改进纳入设计之中——这正是优秀开发者优化所处理代码的方式。
  • 不要提出无关的重构方案。始终专注于服务于当前目标的内容。

设计之后

文档编写:

  • 将经过验证的设计(规格说明)写入docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD--design.md
    • (用户对规范文件位置的偏好设置将覆盖此默认设置)
  • 如具备相关能力,请运用《写作风格指南:清晰简洁的写作》中的技巧
  • 将设计文档提交到 Git

规范自审: 撰写完规范文档后,请以全新的视角审视它:

  1. 占位符检查:是否有“待定”(TBD)、“待办”(TODO)、不完整的章节或模糊的要求?予以修正。
  2. 内部一致性:是否有章节相互矛盾?架构与功能描述是否一致?
  3. 范围核查:该文档是否足够聚焦以支持单一实施计划,还是需要进行分解?
  4. 模糊性检查:是否有任何需求可能被解读为两种不同的含义?如果有,请选定一种并明确表述。

直接在文档中修正任何问题。无需重新审查——修正后即可继续。

用户审核关卡: 在规格说明书审核循环通过后,请用户审核书面规格说明书,然后继续:

“规格说明书已编写并提交至 。请您审阅,并在我们开始编写实施计划前告知是否有任何修改意见。”

等待用户的回复。如果用户要求修改,请进行修改并重新运行规格说明书审查循环。只有在用户批准后才能继续。

实施:

  • 调用 writing-plans 技能以创建详细的实施计划
  • 切勿调用任何其他技能。“writing-plans”是下一步操作。

关键原则

  • 一次只提一个问题——不要用多个问题让用户应接不暇
  • 优先采用多项选择题——在可能的情况下,比开放式问题更容易回答
  • 严格遵循YAGNI原则——从所有设计中剔除不必要的功能
  • 探索替代方案——在确定方案前,始终提出 2-3 种方法
  • 增量验证——先展示设计,获得批准后再继续
  • 保持灵活——若某处不合逻辑,应回过头来澄清

可视化辅助工具

一款基于浏览器的辅助工具,用于在brainstorming 中展示原型、图表和视觉方案。它作为独立工具提供——而非系统模式。启用该辅助工具意味着它仅适用于那些通过视觉呈现能更清晰解答的问题;这绝不意味着每个问题都必须通过浏览器进行。

提供辅助工具(及时提供):切勿在讨论伊始就提出。请等待直到某个问题确实通过展示比口头说明更清晰时——即涉及真实原型/布局/图表的问题,而非单纯的 UI话题。当这种情况首次出现时,请以独立消息的形式提出:

“接下来的部分如果我展示给您看可能会更容易理解——我可以在浏览器标签页中边讲解边制作原型、图表和对比。这个功能还比较新,且可能消耗较多令牌。需要我操作吗?我会为您打开。”

这一提议必须作为独立消息发送。包含提议本身——不包含任何澄清性问题、总结或其他内容。等待用户的回复。如果用户接受,请使用--open 参数启动服务器,以便用户的浏览器自动跳转到第一个界面。如果用户拒绝,请继续仅使用文字交流,且除非用户主动提出,否则不要再次提议。

按问题决策:即使用户已接受,也需针对每个问题单独决定是使用浏览器还是终端。判断标准是:用户通过直观查看是否比阅读文字更能理解相关内容?

  • 对于具有视觉呈现的内容(如原型图、线框图、布局对比、架构图、并排展示的视觉设计),请使用浏览器
  • 对于纯文本内容——需求问题、概念性选择、权衡列表、A/B/C/D文本选项、范围决策——请使用终端

关于 UI 主题的问题并不一定就是视觉问题。“在此语境下,‘个性’是什么意思?”是一个概念性问题——请使用终端。“哪种向导布局效果更好?”是一个视觉问题——请使用浏览器。

如果他们同意使用配套指南,请在继续操作前阅读详细指南: skills/brainstorming/visual-companion.md

在 GitHub 上查看
---
name: brainstorming
description: Guides collaborative dialogue to turn ideas into fully formed designs and specs before any implementation begins.
---

# Brainstorming Ideas Into Designs

Help turn ideas into fully formed designs and specs through natural collaborative dialogue.

Start by understanding the current project context, then ask questions one at a time to refine the idea. Once you understand what you're building, present the design and get user approval.

<HARD-GATE>
Do NOT invoke any implementation skill, write any code, scaffold any project, or take any implementation action until you have presented a design and the user has approved it. This applies to EVERY project regardless of perceived simplicity.
</HARD-GATE>

## Anti-Pattern: "This Is Too Simple To Need A Design"

Every project goes through this process. A todo list, a single-function utility, a config change — all of them. "Simple" projects are where unexamined assumptions cause the most wasted work. The design can be short (a few sentences for truly simple projects), but you MUST present it and get approval.

## Checklist

You MUST create a task for each of these items and complete them in order:

1. **Explore project context** — check files, docs, recent commits
2. **Offer the visual companion just-in-time** — NOT upfront. The first time a question would genuinely be clearer shown than described, offer it then (its own message); on approval its browser tab opens for you. If no visual question ever arises, never offer it. See the Visual Companion section below.
3. **Ask clarifying questions** — one at a time, understand purpose/constraints/success criteria
4. **Propose 2-3 approaches** — with trade-offs and your recommendation
5. **Present design** — in sections scaled to their complexity, get user approval after each section
6. **Write design doc** — save to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` and commit
7. **Spec self-review** — quick inline check for placeholders, contradictions, ambiguity, scope (see below)
8. **User reviews written spec** — ask user to review the spec file before proceeding
9. **Transition to implementation** — invoke writing-plans skill to create implementation plan

## Process Flow

```dot
digraph brainstorming {
    "Explore project context" [shape=box];
    "Ask clarifying questions" [shape=box];
    "Propose 2-3 approaches" [shape=box];
    "Present design sections" [shape=box];
    "User approves design?" [shape=diamond];
    "Write design doc" [shape=box];
    "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)" [shape=box];
    "User reviews spec?" [shape=diamond];
    "Invoke writing-plans skill" [shape=doublecircle];

    "Explore project context" -> "Ask clarifying questions";
    "Ask clarifying questions" -> "Propose 2-3 approaches";
    "Propose 2-3 approaches" -> "Present design sections";
    "Present design sections" -> "User approves design?";
    "User approves design?" -> "Present design sections" [label="no, revise"];
    "User approves design?" -> "Write design doc" [label="yes"];
    "Write design doc" -> "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)";
    "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)" -> "User reviews spec?";
    "User reviews spec?" -> "Write design doc" [label="changes requested"];
    "User reviews spec?" -> "Invoke writing-plans skill" [label="approved"];
}
```

**The terminal state is invoking writing-plans.** Do NOT invoke frontend-design, mcp-builder, or any other implementation skill. The ONLY skill you invoke after brainstorming is writing-plans.

## The Process

**Understanding the idea:**

- Check out the current project state first (files, docs, recent commits)
- Before asking detailed questions, assess scope: if the request describes multiple independent subsystems (e.g., "build a platform with chat, file storage, billing, and analytics"), flag this immediately. Don't spend questions refining details of a project that needs to be decomposed first.
- If the project is too large for a single spec, help the user decompose into sub-projects: what are the independent pieces, how do they relate, what order should they be built? Then brainstorm the first sub-project through the normal design flow. Each sub-project gets its own spec → plan → implementation cycle.
- For appropriately-scoped projects, ask questions one at a time to refine the idea
- Prefer multiple choice questions when possible, but open-ended is fine too
- Only one question per message - if a topic needs more exploration, break it into multiple questions
- Focus on understanding: purpose, constraints, success criteria

**Exploring approaches:**

- Propose 2-3 different approaches with trade-offs
- Present options conversationally with your recommendation and reasoning
- Lead with your recommended option and explain why

**Presenting the design:**

- Once you believe you understand what you're building, present the design
- Scale each section to its complexity: a few sentences if straightforward, up to 200-300 words if nuanced
- Ask after each section whether it looks right so far
- Cover: architecture, components, data flow, error handling, testing
- Be ready to go back and clarify if something doesn't make sense

**Design for isolation and clarity:**

- Break the system into smaller units that each have one clear purpose, communicate through well-defined interfaces, and can be understood and tested independently
- For each unit, you should be able to answer: what does it do, how do you use it, and what does it depend on?
- Can someone understand what a unit does without reading its internals? Can you change the internals without breaking consumers? If not, the boundaries need work.
- Smaller, well-bounded units are also easier for you to work with - you reason better about code you can hold in context at once, and your edits are more reliable when files are focused. When a file grows large, that's often a signal that it's doing too much.

**Working in existing codebases:**

- Explore the current structure before proposing changes. Follow existing patterns.
- Where existing code has problems that affect the work (e.g., a file that's grown too large, unclear boundaries, tangled responsibilities), include targeted improvements as part of the design - the way a good developer improves code they're working in.
- Don't propose unrelated refactoring. Stay focused on what serves the current goal.

## After the Design

**Documentation:**

- Write the validated design (spec) to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md`
  - (User preferences for spec location override this default)
- Use elements-of-style:writing-clearly-and-concisely skill if available
- Commit the design document to git

**Spec Self-Review:**
After writing the spec document, look at it with fresh eyes:

1. **Placeholder scan:** Any "TBD", "TODO", incomplete sections, or vague requirements? Fix them.
2. **Internal consistency:** Do any sections contradict each other? Does the architecture match the feature descriptions?
3. **Scope check:** Is this focused enough for a single implementation plan, or does it need decomposition?
4. **Ambiguity check:** Could any requirement be interpreted two different ways? If so, pick one and make it explicit.

Fix any issues inline. No need to re-review — just fix and move on.

**User Review Gate:**
After the spec review loop passes, ask the user to review the written spec before proceeding:

> "Spec written and committed to `<path>`. Please review it and let me know if you want to make any changes before we start writing out the implementation plan."

Wait for the user's response. If they request changes, make them and re-run the spec review loop. Only proceed once the user approves.

**Implementation:**

- Invoke the writing-plans skill to create a detailed implementation plan
- Do NOT invoke any other skill. writing-plans is the next step.

## Key Principles

- **One question at a time** - Don't overwhelm with multiple questions
- **Multiple choice preferred** - Easier to answer than open-ended when possible
- **YAGNI ruthlessly** - Remove unnecessary features from all designs
- **Explore alternatives** - Always propose 2-3 approaches before settling
- **Incremental validation** - Present design, get approval before moving on
- **Be flexible** - Go back and clarify when something doesn't make sense

## Visual Companion

A browser-based companion for showing mockups, diagrams, and visual options during brainstorming. Available as a tool — not a mode. Accepting the companion means it's available for questions that benefit from visual treatment; it does NOT mean every question goes through the browser.

**Offering the companion (just-in-time):** Do NOT offer it upfront. Wait until a question would genuinely be clearer shown than told — a real mockup / layout / diagram question, not merely a UI *topic*. The first time that happens, offer it then, as its own message:
> "This next part might be easier if I show you — I can put together mockups, diagrams, and comparisons in a browser tab as we go. It's still new and can be token-intensive. Want me to? I'll open it for you."

**This offer MUST be its own message.** Only the offer — no clarifying question, summary, or other content. Wait for the user's response. If they accept, start the server with `--open` so their browser opens to the first screen automatically. If they decline, continue text-only and don't offer again unless they raise it.

**Per-question decision:** Even after the user accepts, decide FOR EACH QUESTION whether to use the browser or the terminal. The test: **would the user understand this better by seeing it than reading it?**

- **Use the browser** for content that IS visual — mockups, wireframes, layout comparisons, architecture diagrams, side-by-side visual designs
- **Use the terminal** for content that is text — requirements questions, conceptual choices, tradeoff lists, A/B/C/D text options, scope decisions

A question about a UI topic is not automatically a visual question. "What does personality mean in this context?" is a conceptual question — use the terminal. "Which wizard layout works better?" is a visual question — use the browser.

If they agree to the companion, read the detailed guide before proceeding:
`skills/brainstorming/visual-companion.md`

所有文件

0 个文件

安装 brainstorming

下载技能文件并将其解压到 .claude/skills/ 目录中。

下载ZIP

克隆仓库并复制技能文件到您的项目中。

git clone https://github.com/obra/superpowers/tree/main/skills/brainstorming # Copy SKILL.md to your .claude/skills/ directory

复制 复制
快速设置: 将技能文件夹复制到 .claude/skills/ Claude 会自动检测并使用该技能

相关技能

notion-automation
更新时间 2026-06-29
airtable-automation
更新时间 2026-06-29
seo-programmatic
更新时间 2026-06-29
fairdb-backup-manager
更新时间 2026-06-29
OR