Brainstorm — Adaptive Requirements Gathering

SkillAI & models

Brainstorm Elixir/Phoenix features — explore ideas, compare approaches,

Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.

Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.

Then ask your AI: use the Brainstorm — Adaptive Requirements Gathering skill

What this skill tells your AI

The instructions your AI receives, as published by oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix in targets/pi/skills/phx-brainstorm/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.

Interactive interview → research → synthesis loop. Produces structured interview.md that /skill:phx-plan detects and consumes (skipping clarification).

Usage

/skill:phx-brainstorm Add some kind of notification system
/skill:phx-brainstorm Improve authentication security
/skill:phx-brainstorm                    # starts with open question

Workflow

/skill:phx-brainstorm {topic}
    |
    v
[INTERVIEW] ←──────────────────┐
    |                           |
    v (sufficient OR user exit) |
[DECISION POINT]                |
    ├─ Research ──→ [RESEARCH] ─┘
    ├─ Continue interview ──────┘
    ├─ Make a plan ──→ STOP (suggest /skill:phx-plan {slug})
    ├─ Store & exit ──→ STOP (artifacts saved)
    └─ Discuss ──→ freeform ──→ [DECISION POINT]

Phase 1: Adaptive Interview

Create .claude/plans/{slug}/ directory. Start asking ONE question at a time.

Coverage Dimensions

Track coverage across 6 dimensions (0=uncovered, 1=partial, 2=sufficient). Ask Scope early — for "optimize X" topics, ask about boundaries (upstream OK? Local-only? CI vs dev?) before research, not during.

DimTargetSufficient signal
WhatSpecific behavior/featuresConcrete verbs, not "some kind of"
WhyProblem solved, user needClear benefit stated
ScopeIn/out boundariesExplicit exclusions stated
WhereModules, contexts, pagesFile paths or context names mentioned
HowApproach, constraintsAt least one concrete constraint
EdgeError states, scale, auth2+ edge cases identified

Interview is "sufficient" when total score >= 8 out of 12.

Context-Aware Questioning

Before each question, run a brief codebase scan on topics the user mentioned:

  1. User mentions a topic (e.g., "notifications") → run Grep/Glob for related patterns
  2. Use scan results to ground your next question in what actually exists
  3. Unknown/niche topic → suggest research pause before continuing

Signal Detection

  • Vague answer ("maybe", "not sure") → probe deeper on same dimension
  • Niche topic mentioned → "This involves {X}. Want me to research it first?"
  • Detailed answer covering 3+ dimensions → mark all covered, advance
  • No new coverage for 2 consecutive questions → suggest moving to Decision Point

Phase 2: Decision Point

MANDATORY: Write interview.md FIRST, then use AskUserQuestion. Never let the conversation flow past this point without a formal choice.

  1. Write current state to .claude/plans/{slug}/interview.md

  2. Show coverage summary: "Coverage: What 2/2 | Why 2/2 | Scope 1/2 | ..."

  3. Use AskUserQuestion with EXACTLY these options (4 max — the tool's hard limit; the auto-added "Other" covers freeform discussion):

    • Research — search codebase + internet for approaches (2 agents)
    • Continue interview — ask more questions
    • Make a plan — I'll suggest: /skill:phx-plan .claude/plans/{slug}/interview.md
    • Store & exit — save everything, come back later
  4. Wait for user response. Do NOT proceed without explicit choice

AskUserQuestion discipline: decisions only, never narration or rhetorical check-ins. Every option states concrete impact (what happens, what it costs) so the user can pick without follow-up questions.

Phase 3: Research (Diverge → Evaluate → Converge)

First cycle: MAX 2 agents — keep it fast (~2-3 min). Spawn in ONE Tool Use block with run_in_background: true:

  • phoenix-patterns-analyst: "How does this codebase handle {topics}?" Write to .claude/plans/{slug}/research/codebase-scan.md
  • web-researcher: "Elixir/Phoenix approaches to {topics}" Return 500-word summary

Do NOT spawn additional specialist agents in the first cycle. If user wants deeper investigation, they pick "More research" at the next Decision Point — then spawn focused agents for specific questions.

Evaluate — for each approach found:

  • Thesis: why it works for THIS codebase
  • Antithesis: why it might NOT work (scale, complexity, pattern conflicts)

Converge — present 2-3 approaches with honest trade-offs. Do NOT recommend one. Return to Decision Point (AskUserQuestion).

See references/research-integration.md for details.

Iron Laws

  1. NEVER auto-transition to /skill:phx-plan — always present as option, let user choose
  2. ONE question at a time — never dump a question list
  3. Always write artifactsinterview.md is the contract with /skill:phx-plan
  4. Scan codebase between questions — every question must be context-aware
  5. AskUserQuestion at EVERY decision point — never flow past without formal choice. This is the most critical law. After interview, after research, after discuss — ALWAYS present options via AskUserQuestion. Never let conversation skip the checkpoint
  6. STOP after presenting options — do not proceed without user input
  7. MAX 2 agents in first research cycle — deeper dives are subsequent cycles. User picks "More research" to go deeper, not the skill

Integration

/skill:phx-brainstorm ──→ interview.md ──→ /skill:phx-plan (skips clarification)
                                 ──→ /skill:phx-plan --existing (deepens)
                                 ──→ stored for later session

Position: optional upstream of /skill:phx-plan in workflow cycle.

References

  • references/interview-techniques.md — coverage scoring, question templates, scan patterns, signal detection, interview.md format
  • references/research-integration.md — diverge-evaluate-converge, agent spawn templates, approach presentation format

Signals

GitHub stars
543
Forks
38
Last commit
Sep 2026
Advanced
Catalog kind
skill
Gateway key
phx-brainstorm
Source
github.com/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix