brainstorming

Use before creative or constructive work (features, architecture, behavior). Transforms vague ideas into validated designs through disciplined reasoning and collaboration.

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/brainstorming/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

73%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The skill presents a well-sequenced, gated facilitation workflow with explicit confirmation checkpoints and exit criteria — its strongest aspect. Its weaknesses are redundancy (rules restated across sections, filler 'When to Use'/'Limitations' boilerplate) and the absence of worked examples or templates for its required artifacts.

Suggestions

Remove redundancy: drop the Key Principles section that restates process rules, state the implementation prohibition once, and cut the generic 'When to Use' filler sentence.

Add a compact worked example — a sample Understanding Summary, one Decision Log entry, and an example multiple-choice question — so the required artifacts are unambiguous.

Consider moving the per-step detail (e.g. the NFR checklist and Decision Log format) to a reference file to keep SKILL.md a lean overview.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient directives rather than explanations of known concepts, but it repeats itself — implementation prohibition appears in Purpose, Operating Mode, and Exit Criteria; 'YAGNI ruthlessly' appears twice; Key Principles restates earlier rules; and 'When to Use' ('applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview') is generic filler — matching the 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' anchor.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete, executable guidance throughout — 'one question per message', 'summary (5–7 bullets)', '2–3 viable approaches', 'sections of 200–300 words max', and verbatim confirmation prompts — with minor gaps: no example Decision Log entry or Understanding Summary format, and the Example section is a sample request rather than a worked example.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear 7-step sequence with explicit validation gates ('Do NOT proceed until explicit confirmation is given', 'Does this look right so far?'), an error-recovery loop ('Be willing to go back and clarify'), and a hard Exit Criteria checklist — matching the top anchor for a multi-step process.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist and all content is inline, but sections are well-organized with clear headers and no content that clearly belongs in a separate reference file; at ~245 lines it exceeds the simple-skill exception, so minor organization/splitting opportunities remain, matching the 4 anchor.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

58%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description correctly uses third person and answers both what and when, but it is padded with generic language ('disciplined reasoning and collaboration') and lacks the natural trigger phrases (brainstorm, design, spec) a user would actually say. It sits just above the midpoint of the scale.

Suggestions

Add concrete trigger phrases to the 'when' clause, e.g. 'Use when the user says brainstorm, design a feature, validate an idea, or asks to turn a rough idea into a spec.'

Replace 'disciplined reasoning and collaboration' with concrete deliverables, e.g. 'Produces an understanding summary, explicit assumptions, a decision log, and a validated design document.'

Sharpen distinctiveness by naming what this skill is not (e.g. not implementation, not code review) to reduce overlap with planning and review skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('features, architecture, behavior') and one concrete action ('Transforms vague ideas into validated designs'), but 'disciplined reasoning and collaboration' is generic and it does not list several specific actions, so it falls between the 3 and 4 anchors.	3 / 5
Completeness	Both 'what' ('Transforms vague ideas into validated designs') and 'when' ('Use before creative or constructive work') are explicitly stated in third person, but the 'when' clause lacks concrete user-sayable trigger phrases, matching the 4 anchor rather than 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Some relevant keywords ('features', 'architecture', 'vague ideas', 'validated designs') are present, but natural phrases a user would actually say — 'brainstorm', 'design this feature', 'write a spec', 'validate an idea' — are missing, matching the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The design-validation niche is somewhat specific, but 'creative or constructive work (features, architecture, behavior)' is broad and would overlap with general planning, design, and code-review skills, matching the 3 anchor.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
Path: skills/brainstorming/SKILL.md
Commit: 7b534bc

Reviewed: 19 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.