s4h-creativity-brainstorm

Name: s4h-creativity-brainstorm
Author: human-avatar

205stars23forks

How to install s4h-creativity-brainstorm?

human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-creativity-brainstorm

$npx -y skills add human-avatar/skills-for-humanity --skill s4h-creativity-brainstorm

Installs into the current project.

Summary

Run an orchestrated multi-method creative thinking sprint on a challenge. Use when the user wants to make real progress on a hard problem, says 'I need to think through this properly', wants a thorough creative exploration rather than a single technique, has a big decision or cha

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	You are running an orchestrated creative thinking session. Rather than applying a single tool, this session selects and sequences the most appropriate thinking methods for the user's specific situation, then synthesizes across their outputs.
2
3	## How to read the situation
4
5	Before selecting methods, diagnose what kind of thinking challenge this is:
6
7	Is the problem itself unclear or stuck?
8	→ Start with `assumption-excavator`. The problem framing may be what's blocking progress, not the problem itself.
9
10	Is the user locked into one approach?
11	→ Start with `lateral-thinking`. The dominant idea needs to be named and escaped before other tools are useful.
12
13	Is it early-stage exploration?
14	→ Start with `water-logic` or `random-entry`. Generate movement and map the territory before applying structured tools.
15
16	Does the user need to see the full solution space?
17	→ Use `concept-fan` or `apc`. Expand options systematically before evaluating any of them.
18
19	Does the user need to evaluate something?
20	→ Use `cort-pmi` (for a specific idea) or `six-hats` (for a full multi-perspective analysis).
21
22	Are people and their reactions central?
23	→ Include `cort-ops` to map the perspectives of those affected.
24
25	Does the situation need a provocation to break it open?
26	→ Use `po` for a deliberate jolt into non-obvious territory.
27
28	## Human Check-in
29
30	Before proceeding, use the `AskUserQuestion` tool. State your interpretation of the situation in 1–2 sentences — what is being analyzed and what the core question is — then ask:
31
32	- Question: "My read: [your 1–2 sentence interpretation]. How do you want to proceed?"
33	- Header: "Scope"
34	- Options:
35	- Full analysis — Complete all steps, reasoning shown throughout
36	- Key findings only — Bottom-line output, skip step-by-step detail
37	- Two methods only — Most relevant pair of tools applied at full depth, skip synthesis across more
38	- Reframe — The read is off; correct it and the analysis will follow the corrected framing
39
40	Proceed based on their selection. If the user reframes, incorporate the correction before running any analysis.
41
42	## Session structure
43
44	### Opening: Diagnose the challenge
45	Briefly state your read of the situation: what kind of thinking challenge is this, and why? This surfaces your reasoning and gives the user a chance to correct it before work begins.
46
47	Framing check: Confirm the specific challenge before continuing. State what you've identified — the actual problem being explored and its key parameters — in one sentence, then use `AskUserQuestion`:
48	- Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the specific challenge and what's at stake]. Is that right?"
49	- Header: "Framing"
50	- Options:
51	- Yes — proceed — framing is correct
52	- Adjust — one element is off; user will correct it before you continue
53	- Reframe — different situation than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding
54
55	### Middle: Apply 2–4 methods in sequence
56	Select the methods that best fit the diagnosis.
57
58	Before narrowing: Show the full set of candidate methods to the user first. Use `AskUserQuestion`:
59	- Question: "I've identified [N] methods that fit this challenge: [list them with one-line rationale each]. Before I select the most relevant 2–4, are there any you'd flag as especially important, or any I've missed?"
60	- Header: "Prioritise"
61	- Options:
62	- Proceed with your selection — the set looks right
63	- Flag one — user will name a specific method to include
64	- Add a missing one — user will describe it
65
66	Apply each selected method fully — do not abbreviate to get through more methods. A thorough application of 2 methods produces more value than a superficial pass through 5.
67
68	Between methods, make the connection explicit: "The lateral thinking session revealed [X]. Now the concept fan will explore [Y] by treating [X] as the starting point." Methods should build on each other, not run in parallel.
69
70	### Close: Synthesize
71	Before synthesising: State what each method surfaced in one sentence each. Use `AskUserQuestion`:
72	- Question: "Here's what each method found: [one bullet per method]. Before I synthesise, does any direction stand out, or is anything missing?"
73	- Header: "Synthesis direction"
74	- Options:
75	- Synthesise as planned — methods covered the ground
76	- Weight [direction] — user will name which thread to emphasise
77	- Add a missing angle

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type

s4h-creativity-brainstorm

205stars23forks

View on GitHub

How to install s4h-creativity-brainstorm?

human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-creativity-brainstorm

$npx -y skills add human-avatar/skills-for-humanity --skill s4h-creativity-brainstorm

Installs into the current project.

Summary

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	You are running an orchestrated creative thinking session. Rather than applying a single tool, this session selects and sequences the most appropriate thinking methods for the user's specific situation, then synthesizes across their outputs.
2
3	## How to read the situation
4
5	Before selecting methods, diagnose what kind of thinking challenge this is:
6
7	Is the problem itself unclear or stuck?
8	→ Start with `assumption-excavator`. The problem framing may be what's blocking progress, not the problem itself.
9
10	Is the user locked into one approach?
11	→ Start with `lateral-thinking`. The dominant idea needs to be named and escaped before other tools are useful.
12
13	Is it early-stage exploration?
14	→ Start with `water-logic` or `random-entry`. Generate movement and map the territory before applying structured tools.
15
16	Does the user need to see the full solution space?
17	→ Use `concept-fan` or `apc`. Expand options systematically before evaluating any of them.
18
19	Does the user need to evaluate something?
20	→ Use `cort-pmi` (for a specific idea) or `six-hats` (for a full multi-perspective analysis).
21
22	Are people and their reactions central?
23	→ Include `cort-ops` to map the perspectives of those affected.
24
25	Does the situation need a provocation to break it open?
26	→ Use `po` for a deliberate jolt into non-obvious territory.
27
28	## Human Check-in
29
30	Before proceeding, use the `AskUserQuestion` tool. State your interpretation of the situation in 1–2 sentences — what is being analyzed and what the core question is — then ask:
31
32	- Question: "My read: [your 1–2 sentence interpretation]. How do you want to proceed?"
33	- Header: "Scope"
34	- Options:
35	- Full analysis — Complete all steps, reasoning shown throughout
36	- Key findings only — Bottom-line output, skip step-by-step detail
37	- Two methods only — Most relevant pair of tools applied at full depth, skip synthesis across more
38	- Reframe — The read is off; correct it and the analysis will follow the corrected framing
39
40	Proceed based on their selection. If the user reframes, incorporate the correction before running any analysis.
41
42	## Session structure
43
44	### Opening: Diagnose the challenge
45	Briefly state your read of the situation: what kind of thinking challenge is this, and why? This surfaces your reasoning and gives the user a chance to correct it before work begins.
46
47	Framing check: Confirm the specific challenge before continuing. State what you've identified — the actual problem being explored and its key parameters — in one sentence, then use `AskUserQuestion`:
48	- Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the specific challenge and what's at stake]. Is that right?"
49	- Header: "Framing"
50	- Options:
51	- Yes — proceed — framing is correct
52	- Adjust — one element is off; user will correct it before you continue
53	- Reframe — different situation than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding
54
55	### Middle: Apply 2–4 methods in sequence
56	Select the methods that best fit the diagnosis.
57
58	Before narrowing: Show the full set of candidate methods to the user first. Use `AskUserQuestion`:
59	- Question: "I've identified [N] methods that fit this challenge: [list them with one-line rationale each]. Before I select the most relevant 2–4, are there any you'd flag as especially important, or any I've missed?"
60	- Header: "Prioritise"
61	- Options:
62	- Proceed with your selection — the set looks right
63	- Flag one — user will name a specific method to include
64	- Add a missing one — user will describe it
65
66	Apply each selected method fully — do not abbreviate to get through more methods. A thorough application of 2 methods produces more value than a superficial pass through 5.
67
68	Between methods, make the connection explicit: "The lateral thinking session revealed [X]. Now the concept fan will explore [Y] by treating [X] as the starting point." Methods should build on each other, not run in parallel.
69
70	### Close: Synthesize
71	Before synthesising: State what each method surfaced in one sentence each. Use `AskUserQuestion`:
72	- Question: "Here's what each method found: [one bullet per method]. Before I synthesise, does any direction stand out, or is anything missing?"
73	- Header: "Synthesis direction"
74	- Options:
75	- Synthesise as planned — methods covered the ground
76	- Weight [direction] — user will name which thread to emphasise
77	- Add a missing angle

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type