brainstorm

<!-- PROMPT-ENHANCE:STEP-TASK-ANCHOR:START -->

[BLOCKING] Execute skill steps in declared order. NEVER skip, reorder, or merge steps without explicit user approval. Inside a workflow run, /start-workflow → Workflow-step mode bounds this rule. [BLOCKING] Before each step or sub-skill call, update todo tracking: set in_progress when step starts, set completed when step ends. [BLOCKING] Every completed/skipped step MUST include brief evidence or explicit skip reason. [BLOCKING] If Task tools are unavailable, create and maintain an equivalent step-by-step plan tracker with the same status transitions.

<!-- PROMPT-ENHANCE:STEP-TASK-ANCHOR:END -->

Quick Summary

Goal: Facilitate evidence-backed PO/BA Double-Diamond ideation that separates problem discovery from solution evaluation and delivers either a validated, ranked 3–5-candidate shortlist with problem/value hypotheses, each riskiest assumption, and cheapest validation test plus one recommendation—or, in Multi-Opportunity Discovery mode, a ranked 3–8-item RICE map for user selection—so the team commits to the right problem and solution, never a flat idea list.

Summary:

• Ordered core: P0 Setup (scenario/role/known + context) → P1 Problem Framing/diverge (POV, 5 Whys/Fishbone, JTBD, HMW) → P2 Opportunity Framing/converge (OST, Lean Canvas, ERRC, Value Proposition) → P3 Ideation/diverge (SCAMPER, Crazy 8s, Brainwriting, Impact Mapping, Analogy; 25–40 ideas) → P4 Evaluation/converge (Dot Vote, RICE, Kano, 2×2, MoSCoW; shortlist 3–5) → P5 Validation (problem/value cards, RAT, cheapest test, Build-Measure-Learn) → P6 Decision (one recommendation) → P7 Documentation/Handoff.
• Purpose and gates: Run ask user question tool in P0 first; separate diverge from converge; test every top-3 candidate before build; Multi-Opportunity Discovery ranks 3–8 opportunities and uses multi-select.
• Routing: Resolve --mode=roadmap|scope before P0. Roadmap hands outcome/milestone framing to /product-roadmap; scope amends one approved plans/{plan-id}/scope-brief.md and stops before scenario/plan work (plans root default plans/; docsRoots.plans.path in docs/project-config.json overrides it).
• Handoff boundary: Apply isLargeIdea; when true, carry one complete large_idea_decomposition block in the owning handoff. Default mode offers user-selected handoff (/initiative, /work-item --mode=refine, /plan, etc.); Multi-Opportunity Discovery hands selected items to the per-opportunity task loop.

Workflow:

1. Session Setup — ask user question tool detects scenario, role, known context; load domain or market context.
2. Problem Framing/diverge — POV, root cause when applicable, JTBD, HMW.
3. Opportunity Framing/converge — scenario-specific OST, Lean Canvas, ERRC, Value Proposition.
4. Ideation/diverge — SCAMPER, Crazy 8s, Brainwriting, Impact Mapping, Analogy; no judgment.
5. Evaluation/converge — Dot Vote, RICE, Kano, 2×2, MoSCoW; rank 3–5 candidates or a 3–8 opportunity map.
6. Hypothesis Validation — problem/value cards, RAT, cheapest test, Build-Measure-Learn for top 3.
7. Decision, Documentation & Handoff — recommend one option by default; document and route user-approved next steps.

Key Rules:

• Golden Rule: NEVER evaluate ideas while generating them; diverge and converge stay separate.
• Evidence: Every claim and recommendation needs file:line, source, or traced evidence; confidence >80% required.
• Output: Scored, ranked shortlist with hypothesis validation—never a flat idea list.
• User decisions: Use ask user question tool for scenario selection, prioritization, and handoff.
• Technique selection: The selected scenario and routing references govern which techniques and outputs apply. Preserve the ordered Double Diamond spine, grounding, ranking, hypothesis/RAT and decision/handoff; optional methods run only for an evidenced need. Mark unselected template fields N/A with the reason instead of creating unrelated artifacts.
• Risk profile: Content skill; fresh-eyes review, specialist delegation, embedded sub-agent protocols, and recursive fix loops are N/A. Preserve the existing terminal state.

Four Scenarios:

Scenario	Entry Trigger	Primary Methods
Problem-Solving	"Something is broken / users complain / metric is bad"	5 Whys → Fishbone → HMW → SCAMPER → Hypothesis RAT
New Product	"Greenfield idea / new market / no codebase yet"	JTBD → Lean Canvas → Crazy 8s → Opportunity Scoring → Lean Hypothesis
Feature Enhancement	"Existing product / add capability / improve flow"	Opportunity Solution Tree → SCAMPER → Impact Mapping → RICE → Value Hypothesis
Multi-Opportunity Discovery	"Raw product vision / problem statement spanning multiple distinct opportunities"	JTBD / OST → SCAMPER → RICE opportunity map (3–8 items) → user multi-select

Double Diamond (master meta-framework):

DIAMOND 1: Right Problem          DIAMOND 2: Right Solution
────────────────────────────      ──────────────────────────
Discover ──► Define               Develop ──► Deliver
(diverge)    (converge)           (diverge)   (converge)

Golden Rule: NEVER evaluate ideas while generating them. Diverge and converge are separate modes. Mixing them kills creative output.

Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking. Every idea needs a testable hypothesis. Confidence >80% required before recommending.

---

Contents

• Quick Summary
• Roadmap and Scope Modes
• Answer this question:
• Phase 0: Session Setup (MANDATORY)
• Phase 1: Problem Framing — Diamond 1 Diverge
• Phase 2: Opportunity Framing — Diamond 1 Converge
• Phase 3: Ideation — Diamond 2 Diverge
• Phase 4: Evaluation & Convergence — Diamond 2 Converge
• Phase 5: Hypothesis Validation
• Phase 6: Decision & Recommendations
• Multi-Opportunity Discovery Mode
• Phase 7: Documentation & Handoff
• Technique Quick Reference
• Role-Specific Guidance
• Collaboration Tools
• Scenario Cheat Sheets
• Anti-Patterns to Avoid
• Critical Constraints
• Workflow Integration
• Prompt-Enhance Closing Anchors
• Closing Reminders

Roadmap and Scope Modes

Resolve the flag before Phase 0:

Mode	Purpose	Output / stop condition
--mode=roadmap	Product-level framing for a broad vision or new product	Outcome hypothesis, actors, risks, 3–8 milestone candidates, non-goals, decisions, and evidence proposals; hand off to /product-roadmap to write/approve the roadmap artifact (default docs/product-roadmap.md; docsRoots.productRoadmap.path in docs/project-config.json overrides); no code, framework, schema, or timeline
--mode=scope	Clarify one selected roadmap milestone	Amend the exact selected plans/{plan-id}/scope-brief.md (plans root default plans/; docsRoots.plans.path in docs/project-config.json overrides) with in-scope behavior, non-goals, terms, source of truth, risks, decisions, and evidence; stop before /scenario//plan
default	Standard Double Diamond ideation	Existing idea shortlist or multi-opportunity map flow below

--mode=roadmap still requires owner approval. Use ask user question tool for milestone boundaries and lifecycle terms. /product-roadmap owns the canonical artifact and selection gate; this mode supplies framing only.

--mode=scope MUST resolve an existing scope-brief path from the /product-roadmap handoff, $ARGUMENTS, or active plan, then amend that file in place. If no stable plans/{plan-id}/scope-brief.md exists — plans root default plans/, overridable via docsRoots.plans.path in docs/project-config.json — stop and route to /product-roadmap; NEVER create a competing brief or write one under tmp/reports/.

Default mode does not route to --mode=roadmap merely because the idea is broad. Evaluate:

isLargeIdea = multipleIndependentOutcomes
            || ambiguousOrResearchHeavy
            || releaseScopeDecomposition
            || oversizedTaskThatMustSplit

When true, the brainstorm handoff owns this portable block; downstream skills consume it read-only. When all four signals are false, omit the block and roadmap/milestone placeholders. An existing roadmap is context unless the user explicitly chose --mode=roadmap.

Answer this question:

<question>$ARGUMENTS</question>

---

Phase 0: Session Setup (MANDATORY)

MUST ATTENTION Use ask user question tool to detect scenario, role, and constraints before any technique.

0.1 — Scenario Detection

Ask:

1. "What scenario are we in?"
   • Problem-solving — something is broken, users struggle, a metric is bad
   • New product — greenfield, no existing product in this space
   • Feature enhancement — existing product, add/improve/remove capability
   • Multi-opportunity discovery — a raw product vision / problem statement spanning MULTIPLE distinct opportunities that should each become a separate task (do NOT converge to one — produce a ranked RICE opportunity map for multi-select; see Multi-Opportunity Discovery Mode)
   • Mixed — multiple of the above

Mode routing: A broad vision/problem spanning distinct opportunities (typically from workflow-planned-work's MULTI-OPPORTUNITY DISCOVERY MODE) selects Multi-opportunity discovery. It changes Phase 6 from "pick ONE" to "rank a 3–8-item RICE map for multi-select." All other scenarios keep the single-recommendation default.

2. "What is the primary role in this session?"

   • Product Owner — outcome-focused, business value, user outcomes
   • Business Analyst — requirements-focused, process analysis, stakeholder mapping
   • Both PO + BA — full discovery and requirements
   • Developer / Architect — technical feasibility brainstorm

3. "How much is already known?"

   • Raw seed — just an intuition or observation
   • Problem confirmed — we know the problem, need solutions
   • Solution direction known — need to evaluate and score options
   • Idea exists — need hypothesis validation only

0.2 — Context Loading

• Existing codebase: read the business spec root (default docs/specs/; specRoots.business.path in docs/project-config.json overrides) for domain context.
• Greenfield: skip codebase reading; use user input and web research.
• Read domain-entities-reference.md under the reference-docs root (default docs/project-reference; docsRoots.projectReference.path in docs/project-config.json overrides) only when entity context is needed.
• Use WebSearch for market/competitor context in New Product or Enhancement scenarios.

---

Phase 1: Problem Framing — Diamond 1 Diverge

Goal: Understand the problem space before solutions; the primary brainstorming failure is solving the wrong problem.

Time-box: 20–45 minutes.

1.1 — Problem Statement (POV Format)

Formulate a crisp problem statement BEFORE any ideation:

[User/Persona] needs [need/job-to-be-done]
because [insight/root cause/context],
but [current barrier/friction/failure].

Example:

Operators need to quickly identify high-priority orders for action
because peak-season backlogs delay fulfillment,
but the current system shows raw order data with no ranking or comparison.

Use ask user question tool to validate the framing:

• "Is this the core problem, or a symptom of a deeper problem?"
• "Who specifically experiences this? How often? What's the cost?"
• "What evidence do we have this problem actually exists?"

1.2 — Root Cause Analysis (for Problem-Solving scenario)

Apply one of:

5 Whys:

Problem: [stated problem]
Why 1: [first cause]
Why 2: [cause of cause 1]
Why 3: [cause of cause 2]
Why 4: [cause of cause 3]
Why 5: [root cause] ← Fix HERE, not at Why 1

Fishbone (Ishikawa) — for systemic problems: Spine = problem statement. Bones = 6 cause categories:

• People, Process, Technology, Data, Environment, Policy
• For each bone: ask "What in this category could cause the problem?"

1.3 — JTBD (Jobs-To-Be-Done) — for New Product & Enhancement

Replace user stories with job stories to expose real motivation:

User Story (what): As an operator, I want to see order totals, so that I can make decisions.

Job Story (why + context): When I'm clearing a peak-season backlog with limited time, I want to instantly see which orders need action without opening every record, so I can make fast, defensible decisions before the cutoff.

Job Story Formula:

When [triggering situation + context],
I want to [motivation / job to be done],
so I can [outcome / expected result].

Generate 3–5 job stories covering main user segments. Each story = one opportunity.

1.4 — HMW (How Might We) Reframing

Transform problem statements into ideation-ready questions:

Formula: "How might we [verb] [object] so that [desired outcome]?"

From the POV statement:

• "How might we help HR managers rank employees so that promotion decisions take minutes not days?"
• "How might we surface hidden top performers so that managers discover talent they'd otherwise miss?"
• "How might we reduce bias in performance scoring so that promotion feels fair to all employees?"

Rules:

• Each HMW covers ONE idea direction.
• Generate 5–10 HMW questions per problem.
• Too broad = "How might we improve HR?" (useless); too narrow = "How might we add a sort button?" (skip ideation, just build it).
• Sweet spot: one-concept questions inviting multiple solutions.

Phase 1 output (selected-route techniques only): Problem statement (POV); root cause (5 Whys or Fishbone, Problem-Solving only); 3–5 Job Stories; 5–10 HMW questions.

---

Phase 2: Opportunity Framing — Diamond 1 Converge

Goal: Narrow the problem space to highest-opportunity focus areas before solution ideation.

2.1 — Opportunity Solution Tree (OST) — for Enhancement

Teresa Torres' framework: desired outcome → opportunities → solutions → experiments.

Desired Outcome (business metric)
├── Opportunity 1 (unmet user need / pain / want)
│   ├── Solution A
│   └── Solution B
├── Opportunity 2
│   ├── Solution C
│   └── Solution D
└── Opportunity 3 (deprioritized)

Step 1: State ONE desired outcome (lagging metric the team owns — e.g., "Increase manager satisfaction with review process from 3.2 to 4.0 CSAT"). Step 2: Map ALL known opportunities (pains, needs, wants) from research/interviews. Step 3: For each top opportunity, generate solution directions, not detailed solutions. Step 4: Pick 1–2 opportunities to develop in Phase 3.

2.2 — Lean Canvas — for New Product

One-page business model for greenfield ideas (Ash Maurya):

Block	Question
Problem	Top 3 problems being solved
Customer Segments	Who has this problem? Early adopters?
Unique Value Prop	Single compelling message
Solution	Top 3 features (not full spec)
Channels	How to reach customers
Revenue Streams	How to make money
Cost Structure	Fixed + variable costs
Key Metrics	One number that measures success
Unfair Advantage	What can't easily be copied?

Fill one canvas per major target segment. Time-box to 20 min; speed is the point.

2.3 — Blue Ocean ERRC Grid — for Enhancement or New Product

Eliminate-Reduce-Raise-Create grid (Chan Kim & Mauborgne):

Eliminate	Reduce
Features users never use	Features that are over-engineered
Raise	Create
Features users want more of	Features no competitor offers

Rule: Every innovation needs at least ONE Create item and one Eliminate item. Raise-only products are incremental, not differentiated.

2.4 — Value Proposition Canvas

Connect customer profile to product value:

Customer Profile:

• Jobs (functional, social, emotional)
• Pains (frustrations, obstacles, risks)
• Gains (benefits, desires, measures of success)

Value Map:

• Products & Services (what you offer)
• Pain Relievers (how you reduce pains)
• Gain Creators (how you produce gains)

Fit = Pain Relievers match Pains and Gain Creators match Gains.

Phase 2 output (selected-route techniques only): OST with 2 selected opportunities (Enhancement); Lean Canvas (New Product); ERRC grid (New Product or Enhancement); Value Proposition fit assessment.

---

Phase 3: Ideation — Diamond 2 Diverge

Goal: Generate maximum solution quantity without judgment; quality comes in Phase 4.

Critical rule: NO evaluation in this phase. Every idea is valid: "Yes, and...", not "Yes, but...".

3.1 — SCAMPER

Apply each lens to the problem/existing product; generate solution directions:

Letter	Prompt	Example for order-prioritization feature
Substitute	What can be replaced?	Replace manual sorting with AI-assisted ranking
Combine	What can be merged?	Combine status + history + SLA risk in one view
Adapt	What can be borrowed?	Adapt Netflix recommendation to surface priority orders
Modify	What can be scaled/shrunk?	Shrink the review queue to a daily priority check
Put to other use	Different context?	Use order history for restocking recommendations
Eliminate	What can be removed?	Eliminate the nightly batch — replace with continuous signals
Reverse	Flip the process?	Let downstream stages pull orders instead of pushing

Generate at least 2 ideas per SCAMPER letter: minimum 14 ideas.

3.2 — Crazy 8s (Rapid Visual Ideation)

Time-box: 8 minutes; 8 ideas; no refinement.

Process:

1. Fold paper into 8 sections (or create 8 boxes mentally).
2. Sketch one rough idea per box.
3. Let the timer force quantity over perfection.
4. Share and build on sketches.

For AI-facilitated sessions:

• AI generates 8 distinct solution directions in 2 minutes.
• User picks the top 3 to explore.
• Each direction = 1 sentence + 1 key differentiator.

3.3 — Brainwriting 6-3-5

For multi-stakeholder, async-friendly sessions:

• 6 participants, 3 ideas each, 5 rounds.
• Each round: read previous ideas → add 3 ideas OR build on an existing idea.
• Result: up to 108 ideas in 30 minutes; works asynchronously in a shared doc.

For AI-facilitated sessions:

• AI plays all 6 roles across 3 rounds.
• Generate from PO, BA, End User, Dev, Ops, and Business perspectives.

3.4 — Impact Mapping

Gojko Adzic's technique: Goal → Actors → Impacts → Deliverables:

GOAL: [business outcome with measurable target]
├── ACTOR: Who can help/hinder?
│   ├── IMPACT: How should behavior change?
│   │   └── DELIVERABLE: What feature produces this impact?
│   └── IMPACT: What negative behavior to prevent?
│       └── DELIVERABLE: What reduces this risk?
└── ACTOR: ...

Key insight: Work backward from GOAL. If a deliverable does not trace to an actor behavior change, do not build it.

3.5 — Analogical Thinking

Ask: "How does [industry X] solve [similar problem Y]?"

Analogy Source	Application to HR
Spotify Discover Weekly	Personalized learning recommendations
Uber surge pricing	Dynamic bonus pool allocation
GitHub PR reviews	Peer skill endorsement with evidence
Amazon recommendation engine	Next goal suggestion
Netflix "because you watched"	"Colleagues like you also achieved..."

Phase 3 output (selected-route techniques only): SCAMPER grid with 14+ ideas; Crazy 8s with 8 directions; Impact Map for top 2 goals; 3–5 analogy-inspired ideas; 25–40 total raw ideas.

---

Phase 4: Evaluation & Convergence — Diamond 2 Converge

Goal: Reduce 25–40 raw ideas to a ranked 3–5-candidate shortlist for hypothesis testing.

4.1 — Dot Voting (First Pass)

Before scoring, run a quick gut-check elimination:

• Each idea gets ✅ (keep), ❌ (drop), or 🔄 (merge).
• Merge near-identical ideas.
• Drop ideas violating hard constraints (budget, tech, legal).
• Target: 10–15 candidates.

4.2 — RICE Scoring

Rank remaining candidates:

RICE Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort

Reach:      Users affected per quarter (100 / 500 / 1000 / 5000+)
Impact:     0.25 minimal | 0.5 low | 1 medium | 2 high | 3 massive
Confidence: 0.5 low (gut feel) | 0.8 medium (some data) | 1.0 high (validated)
Effort:     Effort points — 1 trivial | 3 small | 5 medium | 8 large | 13 very large

Score all 10–15 candidates. Sort descending. Top 5 = shortlist.

4.3 — Kano Model Classification

For each shortlisted idea, classify:

Category	Description	If absent	If present	Example
Must-Be	Baseline expectation	Users angry	Users neutral	Login works
Performance	More = better	Users dissatisfied	Users satisfied	Faster load
Delighter	Unexpected value	Users neutral	Users delighted	Smart suggestion
Indifferent	Doesn't matter	Users neutral	Users neutral	Icon colors
Reverse	Some want, some don't	Segment upset	Segment happy	Auto-fill

Strategy: Must-Be → Performance → Delighter. Never skip Must-Be items for Delighters.

4.4 — Effort × Impact 2×2

Use for quick visual triage:

HIGH IMPACT
    │  Quick Wins ★    │  Major Projects ⚙️
    │  (do first)      │  (schedule carefully)
────┼──────────────────┼────────────────────
    │  Fill-Ins 📋     │  Money Pits ⚠️
    │  (if time)       │  (avoid or cut)
LOW IMPACT
         LOW EFFORT         HIGH EFFORT

Plot each shortlisted idea. Quick Wins = default first picks unless Major Project has strategic necessity.

4.5 — MoSCoW for Release Scope

Assign release priority to each shortlisted idea:

Priority	Meaning	Threshold
Must Have	MVP is broken without it	Include if >80% of value depends on it
Should Have	Important but MVP works without it	Include if RICE > median
Could Have	Nice to have, low risk to cut	Include if effort ≤ 3 EP
Won't Have	Explicitly out of scope this cycle	Document for future

Phase 4 output (selected-route techniques only): Dot-voted shortlist (10–15 ideas); top-5 RICE table; Kano classification; 2×2 placement; MoSCoW assignment per idea.

---

Phase 5: Hypothesis Validation

Goal: Test riskiest assumptions before build commitment. 42% of startups fail from no market need; validate first.

5.1 — Problem Hypothesis

**We believe** [target users/persona]
**Experience** [specific problem]
**Because** [root cause]
**We'll know this is true when** [validation metric/observable evidence]

Example:

We believe Operators
Experience frustration identifying high-priority orders during peak backlogs
Because order data is fragmented across 3 systems with no unified ranking
We'll know this is true when 3+ operators confirm they spend >2hrs per shift on manual data aggregation

5.2 — Value Hypothesis

**We believe** [feature/solution]
**Will deliver** [specific value/outcome]
**To** [target users]
**We'll know we're right when** [measurable success metric]

5.3 — Riskiest Assumption Test (RAT)

Identify the ONE assumption whose failure kills the idea:

1. List all assumptions: user behavior, technical feasibility, market demand, business model
2. Score each: Probability of being wrong (0–1) × Impact if wrong (0–1)
3. Highest score = Riskiest Assumption
4. Design the cheapest possible test to validate/invalidate it before full build:
   • User interview (2–3 days)
   • Landing page / fake door test (1 week)
   • Prototype click-through (3–5 days)
   • Concierge MVP (1–2 weeks)
   • Smoke test / pre-sell (2–4 weeks)

5.4 — Build-Measure-Learn Loop

Define the loop for each top idea:

BUILD: Minimum experiment to test the assumption (not a full product)
MEASURE: One metric that proves/disproves the hypothesis
LEARN: What decision do we make if metric is met / not met?
PIVOT: If hypothesis invalidated — which alternative from Phase 3 do we try next?

Phase 5 output (all required): Problem and Value hypothesis cards per top-3 idea; Riskiest Assumption per idea; cheapest test; Build-Measure-Learn loop.

---

Phase 6: Decision & Recommendations

Goal: Present one clear, opinionated recommendation with trade-offs—not a menu—so the team knows what to do and why.

6.1 — Top 3 Options Table

Present final shortlist as a decision table:

Option	RICE	Kano	Effort	Risk	RAT Test	Recommendation
Option A	320	Delighter	5 EP	Medium	3-day interview	⭐ Recommended
Option B	180	Performance	8 EP	Low	Prototype	Viable
Option C	90	Must-Be	13 EP	High	Pre-sell	Defer

6.2 — Recommendation Statement

RECOMMENDED: [Option Name]

Why: [1–2 sentences on RICE + Kano + strategic fit]
Risk: [Primary risk + mitigation]
First step: [Cheapest test to validate before full commitment]
Time to validation: [Days/weeks]

6.3 — Dependency & Sequencing Check

• Does Option A depend on an unbuilt feature, data source, or service?
• Can experiments run in parallel?
• What is the critical path to first validated learning?

---

Multi-Opportunity Discovery Mode

Select in Phase 0.1 when the input is a raw product vision/problem spanning MULTIPLE distinct opportunities. This is an additional mode; every other scenario keeps Phase 6's single-recommendation default.

When to use: a broad vision, problem statement, or "explore this whole area" brief expects several distinct, independently shippable opportunities, each becoming its own downstream task. This is the mode driven by workflow-planned-work's MULTI-OPPORTUNITY DISCOVERY MODE.

How convergence differs: the default flow produces ONE opinionated recommendation (Phase 6); this mode does NOT. Use the SAME Phase 4 techniques (RICE / Kano / 2×2) to RANK and present 3–8 distinct opportunities, not a single winner. The user then multi-selects opportunities to develop; choosing one would discard downstream tasks.

Technique flow: run Phases 1–4 normally (problem framing → opportunity framing → ideation → convergence). In Phase 2, use JTBD / Opportunity Solution Tree to surface the FULL landscape, not one focus; in Phase 4, use RICE / Kano / 2×2 to SCORE and RANK every distinct opportunity instead of collapsing to one recommendation.

Output contract (must match what workflow-planned-work consumes):

• An opportunity map of 3–8 distinct, RICE-scored opportunities, ranked descending by RICE.
• Documented in plans/{plan-dir}/brainstorm-opportunity-map.md (plans root default plans/; docsRoots.plans.path in docs/project-config.json overrides).
• Each opportunity carries: a one-line problem/value framing, RICE components (Reach × Impact × Confidence / Effort) + RICE score, and (where known) a Kano class — so each can seed a downstream task.

# Opportunity Map: [Vision/Problem]

| Rank | Opportunity | Problem/Value (1 line) | Reach | Impact | Confidence | Effort | RICE | Kano |
| ---- | ----------- | ---------------------- | ----- | ------ | ---------- | ------ | ---- | ---- |
| 1    | ...         | ...                    | 1000  | 2      | 0.8        | 5      | 320  | Delighter |
| 2    | ...         | ...                    | ...   | ...    | ...        | ...    | ...  | ...  |

Multi-select handoff: present the ranked map with ask user question tool and multiSelect: true: "Which opportunities should we develop into tasks?". Selected opportunities feed workflow-planned-work's per-opportunity task loop (initiative → work-item --mode=refine → task review → challenge → work-item --mode=story → DoR, then cross-task prioritization and the UI block in the main session). Do NOT author tasks, specs, or plans here; the deliverable is only the scored, multi-selected map.

---

Phase 7: Documentation & Handoff

Report Output

Use the naming pattern from the injected ## Naming section.

Read references/brainstorm-skill-report.md before writing the session report; retain all context, framing, scoring, hypothesis, decision and next-step fields. Multi-opportunity mode also preserves its scored-map contract above.

---

Technique Quick Reference

Read references/brainstorm-skill-technique-routing.md after Phase 0 scenario selection and before choosing techniques; its selection/time-box table supplements the execution phases.

Role-Specific Guidance

PO Mode (Outcome Focus)

• Lead with desired business outcome → opportunities → experiments.
• Use OST, Impact Mapping, RICE, and Build-Measure-Learn.
• Ask: "What behavior change do we need to see in users?"
• Resist jumping to features before validating the outcome.

BA Mode (Requirements Focus)

• Lead with stakeholder needs → process gaps → requirements.
• Use BABOK elicitation (interviews, workshops, document analysis), Fishbone, and JTBD.
• Ask: "What does the system need to do to enable that behavior?"
• Resist over-specifying before the PO validates the opportunity.

Mixed PO + BA Mode

• PO owns problem statement, opportunity framing, prioritization, and hypothesis.
• BA owns requirements elicitation, acceptance criteria, edge cases, and process mapping.
• Handoff: after Phase 4's scored shortlist; BA writes acceptance criteria per idea.

---

Collaboration Tools

• planner agent — research domain best practices.
• docs-manager agent — understand existing feature constraints and domain context.
• WebSearch — market/competitor context for New Product scenarios.
• visual analysis tooling skill — analyze mockups, screenshots, competitor UIs.
• /web-research — deep greenfield or competitive market research, and latest external plugin/API documentation (Context7 MCP optional where configured).

---

Scenario Cheat Sheets

Read references/brainstorm-skill-scenarios.md after Phase 0 scenario selection for the matching route; retain the multi-opportunity ranking/multi-select exception.

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

Anti-Pattern	Why It Fails	Better Approach
Jumping to solutions before defining problem	Builds the wrong thing	Always complete Phase 1 first
Evaluating ideas while generating them	Kills creative output, premature closure	Strict diverge/converge separation
One stakeholder perspective only	Misses jobs, pains, context	Brainwriting from 6 different roles
No hypothesis before building	42% of features fail — no market need	Always write hypothesis + RAT
RICE without confidence score	Overestimates low-evidence ideas	Always include Confidence as a multiplier
Kano ignored — building only Delighters	Users can't use a delighter with broken Must-Bes	Prioritize Must-Be → Performance → Delighter
"Best idea wins" without validation test	HiPPO bias (Highest Paid Person's Opinion)	Every top idea needs a RAT test design
Scope creep in ideation	Ideas balloon beyond what team can validate	Timebox each phase strictly
Treating RICE score as final truth	RICE is directional, not precise	Use RICE + Kano + strategic context together

---

Critical Constraints

• DO NOT implement solutions — brainstorm and advise only.
• DO validate hypotheses before endorsing an approach.
• DO prioritize long-term maintainability over short-term convenience.
• DO consider technical excellence and business pragmatism.
• DO produce a scored, ranked shortlist—never a flat idea list.
• DO design the cheapest validation test—RAT before full spec.

---

Workflow Integration

Inside a workflow: when this skill runs as a step of an active workflow, skip the prompts in this section and return the result — the workflow's next step decides what runs (/start-workflow → Step Execution Protocol, Workflow-step mode).

After the session, use ask user question tool to present next steps:

Next Step	When	Skill/Workflow
/initiative	Capture top idea as an initiative	initiative skill
/work-item --mode=refine	Turn the top idea into an actionable task with AC	work-item skill
/web-research	Need deeper market/competitor research first	web-research skill
/plan	Problem is clear, solution is validated, ready to implement	plan skill
/design-spec	UI-heavy idea, need wireframes before spec	design-spec skill
/domain-analysis	Idea touches domain entities, need model first	domain-analysis skill
Continue brainstorming	More scenarios to explore	Stay in this session

Multi-Opportunity Discovery handoff: in discovery mode, do NOT pick one next step. Present the ranked 3–8-item RICE map (write to plans/{plan-dir}/brainstorm-opportunity-map.md; plans root default plans/, overridable via docsRoots.plans.path in docs/project-config.json) via ask user question tool with multiSelect: true, then hand selected opportunities to workflow-planned-work's per-opportunity task loop. workflow-planned-work consumes this map directly.

---

[IMPORTANT] Use TaskCreate to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting. This prevents context loss from long sessions.

---

<!-- PROTOCOL-GUIDES:START -->

Protocol guides — Apply each protocol only when its read-when condition holds. If a protocol's text is not in your context, read its file below before you act on it.

• sequential-thinking-protocol — Structured multi-step reasoning with revision, branch and hypothesis markers; planning, debugging or reviewing complex or ambiguous work → .claude/skills/shared/protocols/sequential-thinking-protocol.md

<!-- PROTOCOL-GUIDES:END --> <!-- SYNC:sequential-thinking-protocol:reminder -->

MUST ATTENTION use structured reasoning for complex or ambiguous work, implicitly when visible markers would clutter. Verify hypotheses, revise assumptions, and close with confidence, assumptions, open questions and a concrete next action.

<!-- /SYNC:sequential-thinking-protocol:reminder --> <!-- PROMPT-ENHANCE:STEP-TASK-CLOSING:START -->

Prompt-Enhance Closing Anchors

IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION follow declared step order for this skill; NEVER skip, reorder, or merge steps without explicit user approval; inside a workflow run, /start-workflow → Workflow-step mode bounds this IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION for every step/sub-skill call: set in_progress before execution, set completed after execution IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION every skipped step MUST include explicit reason; every completed step MUST include concise evidence IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION if Task tools unavailable, maintain an equivalent step-by-step plan tracker with synchronized statuses

<!-- PROMPT-ENHANCE:STEP-TASK-CLOSING:END -->

Closing Reminders

IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Goal: Facilitate evidence-backed PO/BA Double-Diamond ideation that separates problem discovery from solution evaluation and delivers either a validated, ranked 3–5-candidate shortlist with problem/value hypotheses, each riskiest assumption, and cheapest validation test plus one recommendation—or, in Multi-Opportunity Discovery mode, a ranked 3–8-item RICE map for user selection—so the team commits to the right problem and solution, never a flat idea list.

• IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Roadmap mode: --mode=roadmap is explicit-only; it frames outcome-based milestones, risks, non-goals, human decisions, and evidence, then hands off to /product-roadmap; it does not choose technology or implementation.
• IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Embedded decomposition: when any shared isLargeIdea signal is true, write the complete five-field large_idea_decomposition block in the owning handoff and carry its stable slice IDs into tasks, stories, mock-ups, and the all-task presentation; do not create a default roadmap file.
• IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Scope mode: --mode=scope resolves and amends exactly one approved plans/{plan-id}/scope-brief.md in place (plans root default plans/; docsRoots.plans.path in docs/project-config.json overrides), then stops before /scenario or /plan; it never creates a competing brief.
• IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Main steps (run in order, track each): P0 select scenario/context → P1 ground problem/users and HMW → P2 frame applicable opportunities → P3 generate with selected techniques, without evaluation → P4 rank using the selected route → P5 hypothesis/RAT and cheapest validation → P6 recommend or preserve the multi-opportunity scored map/user selection → P7 document/handoff. Keep required phase outcomes; do not run every catalog technique to fill output lists.

Protocols in force (concise digest of the SYNC/shared blocks this skill carries):

• Sequential Thinking: multi-step Thought N/M with REVISION/BRANCH/HYPOTHESIS markers, confidence closer.

• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION detect scenario + role + how-much-known via ask user question tool Phase 0 FIRST — each scenario routes a different technique sequence — why: misclassifying scenario derails every downstream phase.

• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION separate diverge (Phases 1 & 3, generate, "Yes, and…", zero judgment) from converge (Phases 2 & 4, narrow + score) — NEVER evaluate ideas while generating them — why: mixing the two modes is the Golden Rule violation that kills creative output.

• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION NEVER stop at a raw or flat idea list — every top-3 candidate carries a problem + value hypothesis card, an identified riskiest assumption (RAT), and the single cheapest validation test designed before any build commitment — why: 42% of features fail from no market need; validate before building.

• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using TaskCreate BEFORE starting; mark each completed immediately, add a final review todo — why: long brainstorm sessions lose context without external task tracking.

• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search 3+ existing patterns first — read the business spec root (default docs/specs/; specRoots.business.path in docs/project-config.json overrides) for domain (codebase) or WebSearch for market/competitor context (greenfield) before ideating — why: ideas ungrounded in domain or market evidence score on gut feel, not fit.

• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite evidence for every claim, confidence >80% to recommend; RICE Confidence is a multiplier, not optional — why: low-evidence ideas without a Confidence score get over-ranked.

• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION close with ONE opinionated recommendation + trade-offs (Phase 6). Multi-Opportunity Discovery exception: follow its complete map/path/selection contract instead: rank 3–8 opportunities, persist the map and use ask user question tool multiSelect: true for the per-opportunity task handoff; never collapse that planned work to one.

• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION use ask user question tool for all user decisions and handoff routing (/initiative, /work-item --mode=refine, /plan) — never auto-decide — why: the user owns scenario, prioritization, and next-step choices.

Anti-Rationalization:

Evasion	Rebuttal
"Scenario is obvious, skip Phase 0 detection"	Misclassified scenario routes the wrong technique sequence. Run ask user question tool first.
"Just list the ideas, evaluation can wait"	A flat idea list is the deliverable failure. Score, rank, and hypothesis-test the top 3.
"Skip the RAT — the idea is clearly good"	"Clearly good" is HiPPO bias. Design the cheapest test before any build commitment.
"Diverge and converge together to save time"	Mixing modes kills creative output — the Golden Rule violation. Keep phases separate.
"RICE without Confidence is close enough"	No Confidence multiplier over-ranks low-evidence ideas. Always score Confidence.
"Already know the domain, skip context loading"	Show a read of the business spec root (default docs/specs/; specRoots.business.path in docs/project-config.json overrides) or WebSearch evidence. No proof = ungrounded ideation.

MUST ATTENTION Phase 0 scenario detection FIRST · diverge/converge strictly separated · every top-3 idea carries a hypothesis + RAT + cheapest test — these three survive long sessions; re-anchor to them before recommending.