Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

pm-brainstorm

Analyze and decompose a product topic into a text-only proposal for the repository's .pm board. Use when the user wants to pressure-test scope, size milestones, identify dependencies, or prepare exact PM board commands without writing board files.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

See how to install

Files included (2)

  • SKILL.md4.2 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml204 B

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Task: Propose milestones and tasks

/pm-brainstorm is the divergent half of the pair: it thinks a topic through, proposes work, and hands orchestration and materialization to /pm. It writes nothing — the output is a text proposal. $ARGUMENTS is the topic/goal.

The board conventions — hierarchy, sizing rule, milestone quality gate, standing closing tasks, templates — live canonically in .claude/skills/pm/SKILL.md. Read that file and apply its rules; do not restate or diverge from them here.

Steps

  1. Load the canon and the anti-goals. Read .claude/skills/pm/SKILL.md (conventions), .pm/DO_NOT_DO.md (hard constraint), and the repository AGENTS.md (keep-it-simple, no speculative defenses, public CLI surface discipline). If a proposed item conflicts with an anti-goal, reject it explicitly and explain why.
  2. Sync with remote main. Before analyzing anything, run git fetch origin main then git status to check whether the local branch is behind. If it is and the working tree is clean, git pull (fast-forward) so the .pm board state you read next reflects the latest remote. If the working tree is dirty or the branch has diverged, report this to the user and ask how to proceed rather than pulling over local work.
  3. Load context. Read the relevant .pm board state (workstream README.mds, open milestones, inbox notes — find .pm -name README.md, plus loose notes) so proposals fit the existing roadmap and reuse its numbering/naming. Choose any existing wN using available capacity, dependency locality, and collision avoidance; every worker is general-purpose, and prior milestone topics do not create a specialty or ownership claim. Propose a new wN only when more independent queue capacity is useful. Also check wN/done/ and any nested done/ folders (find .pm -type d -name done) for milestones that already shipped the same capability — read their titles/READMEs before proposing, and drop or reshape any candidate that duplicates completed work instead of proposing it fresh.
  4. Discuss & decompose. Talk the topic through with the user: pressure-test scope, surface dependencies and risks, and break it into candidate tasks, each with a rough estimate and depends_on links.
  5. Size and gate each cluster of work using /pm's sizing rule and milestone quality gate. Undersized work → propose an inbox note instead of a milestone, and say so. Work that fails the quality gate → mark it not meaningful, do not propose it as a milestone, and suggest a better-scoped alternative.
  6. Emit the proposal as text only. Give the full detail first: the target workstream, each proposed milestone (task table + definition of done + source + goal linkage + expected outcome + why-now rationale) and/or inbox note, numbered in proposed priority order. Propose implementation tasks only: /pm appends the standing closing tasks (Surface parity when the milestone is feature dev/a fix touching the public CLI/SDK surface, then Simplify, then Test coverage, then Closeout) itself when it materializes, so do not include them — but do flag in the proposal whether you expect Surface parity to apply, so /pm and the user aren't guessing. Close with a "Summary (priority order)" section: a numbered list of every candidate (milestones and inbox notes together) using the same numbers as above — one line each: N. <title> (wN, ~size) — one-line outcome — so the user can scan and pick by number without rereading the detail. Do not write files.
  7. Hand off to /pm. End by giving the exact /pm command(s) to materialize the proposal, e.g.:
    • /pm new milestone w1 <title> (then the tasks), or
    • /pm add w1 <idea> for sub-hour work, or
    • /pm promote w1/NNN to promote an existing inbox note.

Topic

$ARGUMENTS

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Assess an immutable patch artifact's program impact, regression risk, and auto-merge eligibility. Use for generated patch files, provider pull-request diffs, or commit ranges when reviewers need evidence about affected runtime paths, contracts, tests, and recoverability. This skill is read-only and does not generate, edit, apply, push, or merge the patch.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

bex-co/bex-security51Updated Oct 18, 2026

Use when Codex is already in the attack-path-analysis phase of a security scan or the user explicitly asks to trace a security finding from source to sink and calibrate severity. Do not use as the primary trigger for full PR, commit, branch, patch, or repository scans.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

bex-co/bex-security51Updated Oct 18, 2026

Use when the user asks for a deep, exhaustive, multi-pass, or variance-reducing repository-wide or scoped-path Codex Security scan. Run repeated complete independent Standard scans with the Codex Security deep-scan tool, which aggregates their validated findings and prepares the canonical artifacts; then complete the same scan once. Do not use for PRs, commits, branch diffs, or working-tree diffs.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

bex-co/bex-security51Updated Oct 18, 2026

Define, review, or update SECURITY.md guidance for a repository or component. Use when the user wants to clarify what Codex Security should review, what is out of scope, which security properties must hold, or whether existing guidance still matches the code.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

bex-co/bex-security51Updated Oct 18, 2026

Use when Codex is already in the finding-discovery phase of a security scan or the user explicitly asks to discover candidate security findings in a repository or code change. Do not use as the primary trigger for full PR, commit, branch, patch, or repository scans.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

bex-co/bex-security51Updated Oct 18, 2026

Use only when the user explicitly asks to fix and verify a validated or plausible security vulnerability. Do not use for ordinary bug fixes, correctness or design review findings, general validation, or full PR, commit, branch, patch, or repository scans.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

bex-co/bex-security51Updated Oct 18, 2026

See all skills by bex-co

Report a problem with this skill