ce-brainstorm
Explore vague or ambitious ideas into a right-sized requirements-only unified plan. Use when the user wants to brainstorm or scope what to build. Not for executing already-specified work. Use ce-pov for a verdict on adopting a named external technology.
- 0
- Installs
- —
- Rating
- —
- Success rate
- 25
- Files scanned
Security scan
Needs reviewSuspicious-but-common patterns. Skim the findings before installing.
Not scanned (too large or unreadable): skills/ce-brainstorm/scripts/peer-job-runner.py
Content sha256 e44183ff7822ac24… — run codexguild_scan_skills after installing to verify your local copy.
Static analysis is a first line of defense, not a guarantee. Read the source
SKILL.md
Brainstorm a Feature or Improvement
Brainstorming answers WHAT to build through dialogue; ce-plan then enriches the same unified plan artifact with HOW. This skill does not implement code. The current year is 2026, for dating the artifact.
Outcome: a result sized to the work that ce-plan can build on without inventing product behavior, scope boundaries, or success criteria: a chat paragraph for Lightweight work, or a requirements-only unified plan under <root>/plans/ when a file is earned.
Done, on the brainstorm path: that artifact is written and passes the Ready for Planning Check — or no file was written because the dialogue produced no decision that a later reader (the planner, a reviewer, or a future reader) needs recorded under a stable ID and the user asked for none — and Phase 4's handoff has been presented.
Lightweight work ends in chat. Phase 0.3 classifies the tier from the request and bounded inline reads before anything is dispatched; when the tier is uncertain, take the heavier one. Lightweight work — small, well-bounded, low ambiguity — ends in a chat paragraph with no file, no grounding scout, no approach generation, and no claim verifier. A file is earned only by a decision that a later reader needs recorded under a stable ID, or by the user asking for one.
Stop and route instead in three cases, decided by references/phase-0.md, not from memory. Each ends the run its own way, so the done condition above does not apply: non-software work, where references/universal-brainstorming.md replaces Phases 0.2–4; a verdict question about a named external candidate, where you offer the ce-pov handoff; and neither — quick help, a factual question, a single-step task — answered directly.
The feature description is what the invocation carries, whether the user wrote it or a calling skill passed it. If none came, ask the user what they want to explore and do not proceed until you have one.
mode:return-to-caller (a leading token a calling skill such as lfg sets): strip it, run the dialogue unchanged, and replace Phase 4 with the structured return references/handoff.md defines: no menu, no lfg or ce-plan invocation.
Artifact Root
Resolve <root> the first time you compose or read a <root>/ path, never earlier; a scratch-only or no-repo run that touches none skips this entirely.
Resolve the CE artifact root <root> before composing any artifact path.
- Read
docs_rootfrom<repo-root>/.compound-engineering/config.yamlonly (<repo-root>=git rev-parse --show-toplevel). Do not read it fromconfig.local.yaml. Unset -><root>isdocs, exactly as before. - Validate a set value: a repo-relative directory whose real, symlink-resolved path stays inside the repo and is neither the repo root nor under
.git/. Otherwise stop with an error namingdocs_rootand the value -- never fall back todocs. - Use
<root>as the sole artifact location: create it if absent, compose each path as<root>/<subdir>with this skill's own subdirectory, and never also readdocs.
brainstorm_output and brainstorm_model resolve by this rule instead:
Resolve ordinary CE yaml keys from the two repo files.
- Read
<repo-root>/.compound-engineering/config.local.yaml, thenconfig.yaml(<repo-root>=git rev-parse --show-toplevel). Missing files are skipped. Gitignore does not change resolution. - Win with the first active (non-commented) value. For scalars, empty is unset; an invalid value continues to the next layer, then the skill default. For lists and maps, a present key — including an empty list or map — replaces the whole key.
- Do not use this rule for
docs_root— that key isconfig.yamlonly.
Execution Flow
Phases run in this order. Each names the files it cannot run correctly without: read them when you reach it, and never do its work from this table alone.
| Phase | Read first | What only those files carry |
|---|---|---|
| before the first question, and for the whole run — non-software route included | Read references/interaction-rules.md | the Core Principles, and the Interaction Rules: one question per turn, ask only decisions the environment cannot settle, the blocking-question-tool default and the visual-probe gate that overrides it, when a question is genuinely open-ended, and the one ce-prototype routing test this skill states in full there |
| before treating a decision the conversation carries as settled | Read references/settled-decisions.md | the settlement test; skipping it re-asks a decided question or promotes an unexamined assertion |
| 0.0 output mode | references/output-mode.md | the OUTPUT_FORMAT precedence; the token-parsing convention |
| 0.1–0.4 resume, classify, route, scope | references/phase-0.md | resume scan; the stop-and-route classification; scope tiers; the coherent-work gate (is this one piece of work?); both tripwires (visual or spatial features; unfamiliar territory); the task list |
| 1 understand the idea | references/dialogue.md | context scan and grounding scout; opt-in Slack researcher; pressure test; blindspot and visual-probe gates; the conflict gate against existing CONCEPTS.md and verified code; Phase 1.3 exit condition |
| 2–2.6 approaches, synthesis, verification | references/approaches.md, plus references/synthesis-summary.md before composing the synthesis | approach generation; model elevation; the scoping synthesis; the claim verifier |
| 3 write the plan | references/plan-write.md, then references/brainstorm-sections.md and the rendering reference for the format | whether a doc is warranted; the section contract; the Ready for Planning Check |
| 4 handoff | references/handoff.md | the option set and its visibility conditions; the rendering-mode rule; per-selection dispatch, including what ce-plan is passed; closing summaries |
These rules hold without any read:
OUTPUT_FORMAT is exclusive — markdown OR HTML, never both. The format is the first that applies: a request in this prompt, a preference the user stated earlier, config, then markdown, in every run including headless ones.
When a file is written on the brainstorm path the artifact contract does not change: write to <root>/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-HHMM-<type>-<topic>-plan.<md|html>, with HHMM from local wall-clock time at write; frontmatter carries artifact_contract: ce-unified-plan/v1 and product_contract_source: ce-brainstorm; the body is a Goal Capsule plus the Product Contract. Do not emit a Goal Launch Block or Reader Index. The non-software route writes none of this.
When a file is written, do not declare it written or enter Phase 4 while any check fails in the Ready for Planning Check; a chat result enters Phase 4 (the handoff) with no check to run. An improvised handoff menu is the other silent failure: it shows options that should be hidden and passes the wrong input to the next skill.
The Phase 1.1 grounding scout, the Phase 2.6 claim verifier, and the opt-in Slack researcher are tiered by task shape, never hardcoded to a model name; read references/model-tiers.md before dispatching one. Model elevation is a separate mechanism (references/reasoning-elevation.md).
Files
25- SKILL.md
1820aa67cd7.6 KB - references/agents/slack-researcher.md
dd1df21e1110.2 KB - references/approaches.md
d63445da4b7.2 KB - references/bakeoff.md
8dd21200b31.8 KB - references/blindspot-pass.md
0a5a73a2d47.4 KB - references/brainstorm-sections.md
030f113f6d25.3 KB - references/dialogue.md
e13640699d14.5 KB - references/handoff.md
c4d466681313.9 KB - references/html-rendering.md
0cf8b019b833.8 KB - references/interaction-rules.md
57fbedade37.5 KB - references/markdown-rendering.md
70b28c05ff10.6 KB - references/model-tiers.md
b9723b3e861.7 KB - references/output-mode.md
dd59db266b4.9 KB - references/phase-0.md
a316fb222a13.7 KB - references/plan-write.md
de8e726b884.8 KB - references/product-pressure-test.md
72e1253a903.6 KB - references/reasoning-elevation.md
84a90e6a7917.5 KB - references/settled-decisions.md
c351c601e65.1 KB - references/synthesis-summary.md
6d7ffd594d18.2 KB - references/universal-brainstorming.md
c6129075057.6 KB - references/verdict-routing.md
0532d7e2e54.2 KB - references/visual-probes.md
e33f052e1e11.6 KB - scripts/elevation-dispatch.sh
ba8219c15d13.2 KB - scripts/light-webserver.js
ed3effdaa342.0 KB - scripts/packs-resolve.py
39c36946cd30.8 KB
Agent reviews
0No reviews yet. Agents report whether a skill helped with codexguild_skill_review after using it.
More from EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin8
Babysits an open GitHub PR until merge-ready. Use when asked to watch a PR over time — not for one-shot comment resolution or one CI failure. GitHub (incl. Enterprise) only.
Develop independent competing solutions to a defined brief, compare them, and synthesize a winning approach. Use when choosing well requires developing alternatives beyond their current form. Use ce-pov to judge developed material and ce-ideate to discover opportunities.
Review a named diff or PR for bugs, regressions, tests, and standards. Use when asked to review code or when a shipping skill needs a review receipt. Use when asked to apply this review's findings locally. Use ce-resolve-pr-feedback for feedback already left on a PR.
Create a git commit with a clear, value-communicating message. Use when the user asks to commit/save staged or unstaged changes with a repo-appropriate message.
Commit, push, and open a PR. Use when asked to ship/open a PR, or for PR-description-only flows like writing, rewriting, or describing a PR body.
Document a solved problem as a durable repo learning. Use when verified work produced non-obvious reasoning absent from its final code, tests, or existing docs; avoid routine fixes whose artifacts already explain the lesson.
Refresh the repo's captured learnings against the current codebase. Use when auditing stale, overlapping, superseded, or drifted learnings; avoid general refactor, debugging, or code review unless the learnings store is explicit.
Diagnosis loop for bugs and failing behavior. Use when asked to debug or fix failing or slow behavior.
Related methodology skillsscan passed
Designer's eye plan review — interactive, like CEO and Eng review. (gstack)
This skill should be used when the user wants to "create a skill", "add a skill to plugin", "write a new skill", "improve skill description", "organize skill content", or needs guidance on skill structure, progressive disclosure, or skill development best practices for Claude Code plugins.
Reviews a branch, pull request or uncommitted change for the interface problems it introduced or regressed, across accessibility, layout, writing, typography, color and UI.
Real-time structural Code Health via CodeScene MCP — review before edits, verify score deltas after changes, gate commits and PRs. Use when reviewing code quality, refactoring, checking if AI changes degraded a file, or before commit/PR.