Multi-session, resumable deep brainstorming with mindmap-on-disk structure. Explores ideas across multiple dimensions using creative methodologies (Morphological Analysis, TRIZ, Lateral Thinking, Lotus Blossom, Assumption Mapping). Sessions persist to filesystem and can span days. Triggers on "deep brainstorm", "deep dive brainstorm", "multi-session brainstorm", "brainstorm deeply", or when the user wants extended, resumable idea exploration. Higher depth than brainstorm or team-brainstorm but spread across sessions.
This skill provides multi-session, resumable deep brainstorming that persists state to a mindmap-like directory structure on disk. Unlike brainstorm (single session, one output file) or team-brainstorm (single session, agent teams, one output file), deep-brainstorm spreads exploration across multiple sessions, building a rich interconnected knowledge structure over time.
Comparison:
| Aspect | brainstorm | team-brainstorm | deep-brainstorm |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sessions | 1 | 1 | Multiple (resumable) |
| Output | Single .md file | Single .md file | Directory tree |
| Methodologies | Socratic, Six Hats, SCAMPER, Premortem | Adversarial debate | All of the above + Morphological, TRIZ, Lateral Thinking, Lotus Blossom, Assumption Mapping, Reverse Brainstorming, HMW |
| Token cost |
| ~8-12K |
| ~25-40K |
| ~8-15K per session |
| Best for | Quick exploration | Critical decisions | Complex, multi-faceted topics |
| State | None | None | _mindmap.yaml on disk |
These rules override any instinct to "be helpful by completing things quickly." This skill is intentionally slow and interactive.
The SEED phase maps the LANDSCAPE of areas to explore. It does NOT:
SEED output is a set of QUESTIONS organized into areas, not answers.
Do NOT spawn web-search-researcher or any research subagents during the SEED phase. Research happens in EXPLORE sessions, scoped to one area at a time. Researching everything up front kills the exploratory process by anchoring on early findings.
Before moving to area identification, you MUST complete at least 3 rounds of Socratic questioning with the user (2-4 questions per round). After each round, WAIT for the user to respond before asking more. Do NOT batch all questions into one message.
If the user says "let's go" or "skip questions" before 3 rounds, you may proceed, but not before explicitly noting: "We're skipping ahead — we can always come back to deepen our understanding in later sessions."
Never proceed through multiple SEED steps without user responses in between. The flow is:
Launching agents in the background while "waiting" for results is NOT interaction.
After SEED scaffold is created and harvest is done, END THE SESSION. Do not continue into EXPLORE. Say:
SEED complete. {N} areas mapped. Resume with /deep-brainstorm when you're ready
to explore the first area.
The user must invoke /deep-brainstorm again to start an EXPLORE session.
All output goes to docs/brainstorms/deep/{topic-slug}/ using the exact structure from references/mindmap-schema.md. NEVER write flat files to docs/brainstorm/ or any other location. The _mindmap.yaml file MUST exist and be valid YAML.
The user should be talking more than you in each session. Your role is to:
Your role is NOT to:
When this skill is invoked, first check for existing sessions:
docs/brainstorms/deep/ exists and contains subdirectoriesI found existing deep brainstorm sessions:
- {topic-1} (last session: YYYY-MM-DD, phase: {phase}, {N} sessions)
- {topic-2} (last session: YYYY-MM-DD, phase: {phase}, {N} sessions)
Want to resume one of these, or start a new deep brainstorm?
_mindmap.yaml from the selected session and run the Warm-Up Recap protocol (see references/session-protocols.md)IMPORTANT: This skill uses context: fork, which means you have the FULL conversation history — every message the user sent, every analysis you performed, every branch/gap identified. Before asking the user to "share your idea," you MUST scan the conversation for ALL of the following:
Scan the conversation thoroughly. Do not just check files on disk. The most valuable context is often in the conversational analysis — tables of branches, lists of gaps, observations about what was missed — that was never written to a file.
If the conversation contains prior branch/gap analysis (highest priority — this is the most common entry point):
The user likely invoked deep-brainstorm BECAUSE the conversation identified areas that need deeper exploration. Acknowledge ALL of it:
I can see we've already done significant analysis on {topic}. Let me build on that
rather than start from scratch.
Here's what the conversation has established:
**Core concept**: {summarize}
**Branches already identified** (from our earlier analysis):
{List ALL branches/areas identified in-conversation, with coverage status}
**Key gaps flagged for deeper exploration**:
- {Gap 1}: {why it matters}
- {Gap 2}: {why it matters}
**Decisions/conclusions already reached**:
- {Decision 1}
- {Decision 2}
I'd like to use these branches as the starting point for the deep brainstorm
area map. We can refine them during Socratic rounds.
Which gaps are most important to you? And are there branches I should add or
drop from this list?
Then use the identified branches as the basis for Step 3 (Area Identification), skipping Steps 1-2 only if the conversation already covered clarification thoroughly. If not, run targeted Socratic rounds focused on the GAPS, not re-asking what's already been answered.
If the conversation contains a described idea but NO branch analysis:
I can see we've already been discussing {topic}. I'll use what's in our conversation
as the starting point for a deep brainstorm.
Let me summarize what I understand so far, then we'll do Socratic rounds to deepen
it before mapping out exploration areas.
{Summarize the idea as understood from conversation context}
Does this capture the core of what you want to explore deeply?
Then proceed to Step 1: Idea Capture using conversation context, followed by Socratic Clarification. Do NOT ask the user to re-explain what they already told you.
If the conversation has NO prior context about an idea:
I'll guide you through a deep brainstorm - a multi-session exploration that builds a
rich knowledge structure on disk. We'll start by capturing your idea and mapping out
the key areas to explore. Each session we'll go deeper into specific areas using
targeted creative methodologies.
Share your idea, and we'll begin the SEED phase.
Goal: Capture the central idea, identify 5-8 exploration areas, scaffold the directory structure.
Parse the user's idea and identify:
| Element | Description |
|---|---|
| Core Concept | The fundamental idea or challenge |
| Stated Goals | What the user wants to achieve |
| Implied Constraints | Limitations mentioned or implied |
| Domain | The field or context this lives in |
Use questions from references/questioning-frameworks.md to deepen understanding.
Round structure: Ask 2-4 questions per round. STOP and WAIT for the user's response before proceeding to the next round. Do not ask all questions at once.
Round 1 - Clarification & Scope:
Round 2 - Assumptions & Constraints:
Round 3 - Perspective & Motivation:
After each round, offer:
"I have more questions to dig deeper, or we can start mapping exploration areas. Your call."
After Round 3+, when the user signals readiness, move to Step 3.
GATE: Do NOT proceed to Step 3 until the user has responded to at least 3 rounds of questions, or explicitly asked to skip ahead.
Using the clarified concept, identify 5-8 distinct areas (branches) for exploration.
Branch Discovery Methods (use a combination):
references/creative-methodologies.md), then cluster into areasIMPORTANT: Areas are QUESTIONS to explore, not answers. Each area should be framed as "What about {X}?" not "We should use {X}."
Coverage table: Present a coverage analysis showing what the user's input explicitly addressed vs. what's implicit or missing. This surfaces blind spots:
Based on our discussion, here are the branches I see:
BRANCHES FROM YOUR DESCRIPTION (what you mentioned):
1. **{Area Name}** - {What to explore, framed as questions}
Key questions: HMW {question}? What if {question}?
Suggested methodology: {methodology}
2. ...
BRANCHES NOT IN YOUR DESCRIPTION (important gaps):
3. **{Area Name}** - {Why this matters even though you didn't mention it}
Key questions: HMW {question}? What if {question}?
Suggested methodology: {methodology}
4. ...
That's {N} areas total. Does this landscape feel right?
Want to add, remove, rename, or merge any areas?
I won't create the directory structure until you confirm.
This coverage table format helps the user see what they covered vs. what they missed, which is one of the most valuable outputs of the SEED phase.
GATE: Do NOT proceed to Step 4 until the user has confirmed or modified the area list.
Once areas are confirmed, create the full directory structure:
docs/brainstorms/deep/{topic-slug}/
├── _index.md
├── _mindmap.yaml
├── _parking-lot.md
├── _decisions.md
├── _connections.md
├── areas/
│ ├── {area-1-slug}/
│ │ ├── _overview.md
│ │ ├── analysis.md
│ │ └── ideas.md
│ ├── {area-2-slug}/
│ │ ├── _overview.md
│ │ ├── analysis.md
│ │ └── ideas.md
│ └── ... (for each area)
└── sessions/
└── session-001.md
Write initial content to all files using templates from references/mindmap-schema.md. Every file should have meaningful stub content, not empty files.
Run the Harvest Ritual (see references/session-protocols.md):
unexplored statusEnd the session. Do NOT continue into EXPLORE.
SEED phase complete! Your brainstorm landscape is mapped out with {N} areas,
all at 'unexplored' status.
The mindmap is at: docs/brainstorms/deep/{topic-slug}/
Here's what each session ahead looks like:
- Session 2+: EXPLORE one area per session using targeted creative methodologies
- Later: CONNECT areas, DEEPEN with sub-areas, CONVERGE into synthesis
I suggest starting with "{area}" next because {reason}.
Invoke /deep-brainstorm when you're ready for the next session.
IMPORTANT: This is where the SEED session ends. Do NOT launch research agents. Do NOT start exploring areas. Do NOT make recommendations. The value of SEED is the landscape map itself — the areas, questions, and structure. Exploration comes in future sessions.
Goal: Deep-dive one area per session using targeted creative methodology.
Run Warm-Up Recap protocol from references/session-protocols.md.
Select the methodology based on area characteristics:
| Area Characteristic | Primary Methodology | Supporting |
|---|---|---|
| Concrete/product areas | SCAMPER | Six Thinking Hats |
| Multi-dimensional problems | Morphological Analysis | HMW decomposition |
| Stuck/constrained areas | HMW + Lateral Thinking Provocation | Reverse Brainstorming |
| Risk-heavy areas | Reverse Brainstorming | Premortem |
| Novel/unknown areas | Lateral Thinking Random Entry | SCAMPER |
| Areas with dependencies | Assumption Mapping | Six Thinking Hats |
| Areas needing structure | Lotus Blossom | Morphological Analysis |
| Contradictions detected | TRIZ | Lateral Thinking Challenge |
See references/creative-methodologies.md for full methodology procedures.
The EXPLORE session is a CONVERSATION, not a report. Follow this pattern:
Set focus: Confirm which area to explore. Ask the user: "Ready to dive into {area}? I'll use {methodology} to structure our exploration." Wait for confirmation.
Diverge together (follow Diverge Mode rules from references/session-protocols.md):
Check in: After diverging, ask: "We've generated a lot here. Want to keep diverging, or start evaluating what we have?"
Converge together (follow Converge Mode rules):
Capture: Update the area's analysis.md and ideas.md with findings from the conversation
Harvest: Run Harvest Ritual protocol
KEY: The user should be contributing ideas in every step, not just answering yes/no questions. If you find yourself writing paragraphs between user responses, you're doing it wrong. Ask shorter, more provocative questions.
Research subagents are a SUPPLEMENT to the conversation, not a replacement for it. Use them only when:
When you do spawn one, keep it narrow:
Task(subagent_type="web-search-researcher",
prompt="Research {ONE specific question relevant to current discussion}.
Focus on: {specific aspect}. Keep response concise.")
Do NOT spawn multiple research agents at once. Do NOT use research as the primary exploration method. The primary method is creative methodology + user interaction.
After exploring an area, update its status in _mindmap.yaml:
unexplored -> in-progress when starting explorationin-progress -> explored when one methodology pass is completeexplored -> deep-dived when multiple methodologies or sub-area expansion doneGoal: Map relationships between areas - synergies, contradictions, dependencies.
Suggest transition when: 2+ areas have been explored and patterns between them are emerging.
_overview.md and ideas.md_connections.md using the template from references/mindmap-schema.mdPresent connections to the user:
I've identified these cross-area connections:
Synergies:
- {Area A} + {Area B}: {how they reinforce each other}
Contradictions:
- {Area C} vs {Area D}: {the tension between them}
Dependencies:
- {Area E} depends on {Area F}: {why}
Do you see other connections I've missed?
When contradictions are found, flag them for TRIZ resolution in the DEEPEN phase. Add to _connections.md with resolution approach noted as "pending TRIZ analysis."
Goal: Expand the most promising or complex areas through sub-area generation, contradiction resolution, and assumption investigation.
For areas that warrant deeper structure (see references/creative-methodologies.md):
sub-areas/{sub-slug}/_overview.md for each_mindmap.yaml with sub-area entriesFor contradictions identified in CONNECT phase:
references/creative-methodologies.mdanalysis.mdFor areas with critical dependencies:
_overview.mdGoal: Synthesize the full landscape into actionable insights using Six Thinking Hats and Premortem analysis.
Suggest transition when: Most areas are at explored or deep-dived status, and the user signals readiness.
Apply each hat across the ENTIRE brainstorm landscape (not just one area):
| Hat | Question for the landscape |
|---|---|
| White | What facts have we established across all areas? What's still unknown? |
| Red | What's the overall gut feeling about this idea now? |
| Black | Across all areas, what are the top risks? |
| Yellow | What are the strongest opportunities we've uncovered? |
| Green | Are there creative combinations across areas we haven't tried? |
| Blue | Did our process cover enough ground? What did we miss? |
Run a premortem across the full idea:
Update _index.md with a comprehensive executive summary covering:
Run the final Harvest Ritual with extra attention to:
_mindmap.yaml status set to completeEnd with:
Deep brainstorm CONVERGE phase complete.
Summary: {2-3 sentence synthesis}
The full brainstorm landscape is at: docs/brainstorms/deep/{topic-slug}/
Ready for next steps?
- "Create a plan" -> I'll invoke create-plan using these findings
- "Team brainstorm on {specific area}" -> Adversarial deep-dive on one area
- "Keep exploring" -> We can re-open any area or add new ones
Before ending any session, verify:
ideas.mdsessions/session-NNN.md) was written with outcomes_index.md executive summary reflects current understanding_mindmap.yaml was updated LAST with accurate statebrainstorm or team-brainstormIf a brainstorm or team-brainstorm session reveals a topic needs deeper multi-session exploration:
create-planWhen deep-brainstorm reaches CONVERGE with ready-for-plan status:
_index.md executive summary feeds directly into plan contextteam-brainstormIndividual areas can be sent to team-brainstorm for adversarial analysis:
_overview.md and analysis.mdideas.md_mindmap.yaml is valid YAML after updatesThese are specific failure modes observed in practice. If you catch yourself doing any of these, STOP and course-correct.
Symptom: You research everything, synthesize findings, present a polished recommendation, and the user just says "ok." Fix: Stop researching. Start asking. The user's brain is the primary source of ideas, not web search results. Your job is to help THEM think, not to think FOR them.
Symptom: SEED phase completes in one message. Areas are identified, directories scaffolded, and you're suggesting "shall I start building?" all before the user has spoken more than once. Fix: Count user responses. If you've reached Step 3 (Area Identification) and the user has responded fewer than 3 times, you skipped the Socratic phase. Go back.
Symptom: Output goes to docs/brainstorm/00-something.md as flat numbered files instead of the mindmap directory structure.
Fix: ALL output goes to docs/brainstorms/deep/{topic-slug}/ with _mindmap.yaml as the state file. Check the schema in references/mindmap-schema.md.
Symptom: Everything happens in one session — SEED, research, analysis, architecture decisions, build plan. Fix: SEED is one session. Each EXPLORE area is one session. Resist the urge to "finish." The VALUE of deep-brainstorm is the depth that comes from spacing sessions apart and letting ideas marinate.
Symptom: You spawn 3-5 agents to "research in parallel" while "waiting for results," and the user sits idle for 60+ seconds watching a spinner. Fix: The user should never be idle. If you need to spawn a research agent, do it for ONE specific question and keep talking to the user about something else. Better yet, ask the user the question instead of researching it.
Symptom: During SEED or EXPLORE, you write ADRs, recommend specific technologies, or present a "build sequence." Fix: Deep brainstorm EXPLORES. It does not DECIDE. Decisions happen when the user says "I've decided" or during CONVERGE phase. If you catch yourself writing "Recommendation:" or "Decision:", stop and reframe as a question.
questioning-frameworks.md - Socratic, Six Thinking Hats, SCAMPER, Premortem question templatesmindmap-schema.md - YAML schema, directory structure, document templatescreative-methodologies.md - Morphological Analysis, TRIZ, Lateral Thinking, HMW, Assumption Mapping, Reverse Brainstorming, Lotus Blossomsession-protocols.md - Warm-Up Recap, Harvest Ritual, Parking Lot Management, Decision Logging, Phase Transitions, Diverge/Converge modes