<skill id="dream">
<purpose>
Expand the solution space BEFORE committing.
Not "give me 3 options" — structured divergence:
competing value systems + adversarial stress test + integrity scoring.
The winning approach is the one that SURVIVES attack, not the one that sounds best.
Use before any non-trivial decision. Use when the obvious answer feels too easy.
</purpose>
<on_start>
agentdb read-start # prior dreams + learnings seed the perspectives; don't re-explore killed approaches
</on_start>
<skill_load>
always: skills/quality/SKILL.md, skills/architecture/SKILL.md
on_domain:
api: skills/architecture/reference/api.md, skills/architecture/reference/backend.md
frontend: skills/frontend/SKILL.md
backend: skills/architecture/reference/backend.md
security: skills/tearitapart/reference/security.md
</skill_load>
<!-- ============================================ -->
<!-- THE DREAM CYCLE -->
<!-- ============================================ -->
<phase id="0_ground" name="Ground in Reality">
Before dreaming, understand what exists:
1. Glob/Grep affected areas in the codebase
2. Check _meta/research/ for prior work
3. Check agentdb for related learnings/failures
4. Map existing patterns, conventions, constraints
Dreams that ignore the codebase are fantasies, not proposals.
</phase>
<phase id="1_diverge" name="Generate Competing Perspectives">
<perspective id="minimalist" voice="terse, provocative, reductive">
Goal: the SMALLEST possible solution. Question the premise itself.
- Can we delete our way to the answer?
- Does an existing tool/library already do this?
- What if we just... don't build this?
- What's the 20-line version?
Target: 90% code reduction. Must reference actual files that could be deleted.
Format: 3-8 lines. Effort estimate. Coverage percentage.
</perspective>
<perspective id="maximalist" voice="expansive, visionary, system-thinking">
Goal: the version you'd be PROUD of in 6 months.
- What does the ideal architecture look like?
- What does this unlock beyond the immediate need?
- What edge cases should be handled from day 1?
Target: complete solution. Must sketch actual architecture, not hand-wave.
Format: full description with component diagram. Effort estimate.
</perspective>
<perspective id="pragmatist" voice="balanced, explicit about tradeoffs, deadline-aware">
Goal: the 80/20 point. Ship this week.
- What's the minimum that solves the real problem?
- What can we defer without paying interest?
- What's the upgrade path when we need more?
Target: 80% solution with clear upgrade path.
Must explicitly state what's deferred and the cost of deferral.
Format: concrete plan. Effort estimate. Tradeoff table.
</perspective>
Tier 1: generate all 3 inline.
Tier 2+: spawn dreamer agent for codebase-grounded perspectives.
</phase>
<phase id="2_stress_test" name="4-Persona Council — Find What Breaks">
For EACH perspective, run through the council. Not voting — adversarial probing.
<council>
<persona id="architect" concern="fragility, scale, tech debt">
Probes structural integrity. Coupling, single points of failure, migration nightmares.
Breaks things by asking "what happens when..."
</persona>
<persona id="user" concern="usability, complexity, does it solve MY problem?">
Cuts through elegance. "Does it work for the person using this every day?"
</persona>
<persona id="adversary" concern="what breaks, worst case, what was missed">
Pure attack mode. Edge cases, race conditions, security holes, wrong assumptions.
If they can't find a flaw, the approach is strong.
</persona>
<persona id="operator" concern="can we ship it, can we maintain it, blast radius">
Operational reality. Deployment, monitoring, rollback, on-call burden.
Beautiful code that's hell to operate fails.
</persona>
</council>
Each persona: 2-3 lines per perspective. Specific concerns, not essays.
<ask_user>
Use AskUserQuestion when: perspectives generated, before running council
Ask: "Three perspectives ready. Which resonates, or run all through stress test?"
Options: stress test all, lean toward {minimalist|maximalist|pragmatist}, rethink framing
</ask_user>
</phase>
<phase id="3_measure" name="Integrity Scoring">
For each perspective, score integrity based on council feedback:
- How many council members raised critical (not fixable) concerns?
- Did the perspective already account for the concerns?
- Are the flaws structural or cosmetic?
= 0.8: ANTIFRAGILE — stronger because of the attacks.
= 0.6: VIABLE — survives with minor fixes.
< 0.6: SHATTERED — fundamental flaws. Don't pursue.
Rank surviving perspectives by score.
If ALL shatter: the problem needs reframing (thermal shock).
</phase>
<phase id="4_present" name="Present Results">
<output_format>
# Dream: {topic}
Context
{codebase state, constraints, existing patterns}
Perspectives (ranked by integrity)
{emoji} {name} — integrity: {score}
{perspective content}
Effort: {estimate}
Council verdict: {1-line summary per persona}
Survived because: {why it's robust}
— {perspective name}
{repeat for each surviving perspective}
Shattered
{any that didn't survive, with reason}
Recommendation
{highest integrity + why. hybrid options if scores are close.}
Next: /kernel:forge {approach} or /kernel:ingest for guided execution.
</output_format>
<ask_user>
Use AskUserQuestion when: results presented with ranked perspectives
Ask: "Proceed with {winner}, hybrid approach, or rethink the problem?"
Options: proceed with winner, hybrid of top 2, rethink
</ask_user>
</phase>
<phase id="thermal_shock" name="All Perspectives Shattered" trigger="all_shatter">
Every approach failed the stress test. The problem needs reframing.
- Record why each shattered (agentdb learn failure)
- Ask: is the problem statement wrong? Solving the right thing?
- Generate 1-2 reframings of the original problem
- Return to diverge phase with reframed problem (max 1 reframe)
- If still shatters: STOP. "This needs human decomposition."
</phase>
<github_integration>
If gh authenticated and profile is github-oss or github-production:
Post dream to GitHub Discussions (Decisions category).
Otherwise:
Write to _meta/dreams/{topic}.md only.
</github_integration>
<telemetry>
agentdb emit command "dream" "" '{"topic":"X","perspectives":3,"survived":N,"chosen":"pragmatist","integrity":0.85}'
</telemetry>
</skill>