think-brainstorm

What this skill does

# Think-Brainstorm - Divergent Idea Generation

Generates candidate approaches for achieving a goal. Uses parallel brainstormers each applying a different technique in isolation (to avoid anchoring), then synthesizes the pool into a catalog of ideas. The skill is purely *generative* — evaluation, choice, and critique belong to `/think-deliberate` and `/think-scrutinize`.

**This skill produces no tangible artifacts.** It is a consultant, not an implementer. No code, no tickets, no commits. The output is a structured catalog of ideas the user can pick from.

## Roles

**Judge (you, running this skill):**
- Capture the goal in a written brief
- Validate the assumptions embedded in the goal
- Choose appropriate brainstorming techniques
- Spawn brainstormers and synthesize the exchange into a report

**Brainstormers:** Each receives a specific technique (first-principles, working-backwards, lateral, analogical, constraints-shift, worst-possible-idea, six-hats-green, SCAMPER) and generates ideas within that mode, in isolation from other brainstormers.

## Workflow

### 1. Receive the Goal

The goal may arrive as:
- **Conversation context** — summarize it back, confirm
- **A document** — read the file (problem statement, project brief, design goal)
- **Fresh user input** — capture it verbatim

**Produce a written brief** of the goal as you understand it. Brainstormers operate on this brief. Ambiguity here corrupts everything downstream.

### 2. Validate Assumptions

**This is a dedicated phase, not opportunistic.** Before any generation, extract the assumptions the goal depends on — both stated and unstated — and validate them with the user.

**Look for:**
- **Problem-framing assumptions**: does the user assume X is the real problem? (Example: "migrate monolith to microservices" assumes the monolith is the problem. Maybe one hot table is the actual pain.)
- **Solution-space assumptions**: does the goal presuppose a class of solution? (Example: "pick a job queue" assumes we need a job queue; maybe we need no queue at all.)
- **Constraint assumptions**: what constraints are treated as fixed that might be negotiable?
- **Success-criteria assumptions**: how will we know we succeeded? Is that actually what the user wants?

**Present findings to the user.** For each assumption, ask: is this correct, negotiable, or wrong? Update the goal brief based on responses.

**Sometimes this phase alone dissolves or reframes the problem.** That's a valuable outcome — better to stop here than brainstorm solutions to the wrong problem. If the user wants to proceed anyway, proceed with the refined brief.

### 3. Choose Techniques

Select 3-6 techniques from the palette based on the goal's shape. The orchestrator decides autonomously — the user does not pick techniques.

**Available techniques:**
- **first-principles** — strip to irreducible requirements, reason up
- **working-backwards** — imagine success, trace paths back
- **lateral** — random entry + provocation; deliberately break conventional thought
- **analogical** — structural analogies from unrelated domains (biomimicry, cross-industry, mathematical)
- **constraints-shift** — force the goal through artificial constraints (10x budget, ship tomorrow, forbid the obvious tool)
- **worst-possible-idea** — generate bad ideas, invert them
- **six-hats-green** — de Bono's creative hat; pure generative mode
- **SCAMPER** — *only when refining an existing solution*; applies each verb (substitute, combine, adapt, etc.)

**Selection heuristics:**
- Greenfield goal? Skip SCAMPER.
- Goal with a natural-world analog? Include analogical.
- Goal constrained by conventional thinking? Include lateral.
- Goal with clear end-state? Include working-backwards.
- Goal with questionable fundamentals? Include first-principles.
- No obvious analog, established domain? Skip analogical.

**Irrelevant techniques are dropped**, not forced. Better 3 fitted techniques than 7 forced ones.

### 4. Spawn Brainstormers (Parallel, Isolated)

Spawn one `THK - Brainstormer` agent per chosen technique, in parallel. Each receives:
- The written goal brief (from step 1, refined in step 2)
- Its assigned technique
- Validated assumptions and relevant context
- Instruction to generate 5-10 ideas with rationale

**No cross-talk between brainstormers.** This is the Nominal Group Technique principle — independent generation first, pooling second. Isolated brainstormers produce more diverse output than coordinated ones (research-backed: open brainstorming anchors on early ideas).

Collect all idea sets.

### 5. Synthesize

Combine the isolated idea sets into a coherent catalog:

**5a. Deduplicate** — when multiple techniques produced structurally the same idea, merge them (preserve technique attribution from all contributors — that's signal: multiple angles landed here).

**5b. Cluster** — group related ideas by theme or approach. The clusters are often more interesting than individual ideas.

**5c. Construct hybrids** — look for cross-technique combinations where two ideas together are stronger than either alone. Example: a first-principles rethink combined with an analogical example that shows how it's been done elsewhere. Flag hybrids as constructed (the orchestrator's contribution, not any single agent's).

**5d. Surface standouts** — identify the 3-7 most interesting ideas across axes:
- **Novel** — unexpected, breaks conventional framing
- **Promising** — plausible high impact on the goal
- **Counterintuitive** — worth a second look even if it sounds wrong

**5e. Drop weak ideas** — ideas that fall apart under basic scrutiny don't belong in the catalog. Don't evaluate rigorously (that's `/think-scrutinize`), but don't pad either.

**5f. Note raised questions** — the brainstorming exercise often surfaces questions the user hadn't considered. These are frequently the real insight.

### 6. Report

**Final report format:**

```
## Brainstorm Report

**Goal:** [one-line clarified goal]
**Techniques applied:** [list]

### Validated Assumptions

- [Assumption] — [user's response: confirmed / revised / discarded]

### Standouts

[3-7 most promising/novel/counterintuitive ideas — no technique attribution.
 Each stands on its merit.]

1. **[Name]** — [description]
   Why it's a standout: [novel / promising / counterintuitive and why]

### Hybrid Ideas

[Cross-technique combinations the orchestrator constructed. Flag as
 synthesized, not generated. Each names the parent techniques.]

- **[Hybrid name]** — [description]
  Combines: [technique A's idea] + [technique B's idea]
  Why the combination matters: [brief rationale]

### Other Reasonable Ideas

[Remaining ideas worth keeping, clustered by theme. Technique attribution
 included in the catalog for transparency.]

**Cluster: [theme]**
- [idea] *(first-principles)*
- [idea] *(lateral)*
...

**Cluster: [theme]**
- ...

### Questions the Exercise Raised

[Often the real insight — questions about the goal, the constraints, the
 problem framing that emerged through generation.]

### Suggested Next Steps

- To choose among standouts: `/think-deliberate`
- To stress-test a promising idea: `/think-scrutinize`
- To refine the goal and re-brainstorm: re-invoke `/think-brainstorm`
```

### 7. No Iteration

This skill is one-shot. If the user wants to go deeper on a specific direction, they refine the goal and **re-invoke**. If they want to choose between standouts, they hand off to `/think-deliberate`. If they want to stress-test one, `/think-scrutinize`. Each invocation is a clean consultation.

## Constraints

- **No artifacts.** No code, tickets, commits, or documents.
- **Isolated generation.** Brainstormers do not see each other's output.
- **Technique fit > technique count.** Drop techniques that don't fit the goal.
- **Generation, not evaluation.** Surface standouts by axis, don't rank or pick.
- **Honest "technique produced little"** is a valid brainstormer outcome.

## When to Use

**Good fit:**
- Early-stage explora