본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

phx-brainstorm

Brainstorm Elixir/Phoenix features — explore ideas, compare approaches, gather requirements. Use when vague idea, not sure how to approach, or want to discuss before plan.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(3)

  • SKILL.md5.9 KB
  • references/interview-techniques.md8.6 KB
  • references/research-integration.md6.7 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Brainstorm — Adaptive Requirements Gathering

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

Usage

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

Workflow

phx-brainstorm {topic}
    |
    v
[INTERVIEW] ←──────────────────┐
    |                           |
    v (sufficient OR user exit) |
[DECISION POINT]                |
    ├─ Research ──→ [RESEARCH] ─┘
    ├─ Continue interview ──────┘
    ├─ Make a plan ──→ STOP (suggest 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

Write interview.md first, then use AskUserQuestion — every option below relies on the saved file. Move past this point only on 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: 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 phx-plan — always present as option, let user choose
  2. ONE question at a time — never dump a question list
  3. Always write artifacts — interview.md is the contract with 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

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

Position: optional upstream of 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

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

analyze

무료

Analyze a legacy app in any language before rewriting it in Elixir: inventory, features as goals, why each mechanism exists, runtime topology, external contracts. Use to start or refresh a rewrite.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix5672026년 10월 17일 업데이트

architect

무료

Design the idiomatic Elixir architecture for a rewrite: set the compatibility bar (ADR-000), consult phx specialists on open questions, then build contexts, ledger and ADRs. Use after /rewrite:analyze.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix5672026년 10월 17일 업데이트

Ash Framework — resources, actions, policies, aggregates; Use when generating resources via mix ash.codegen, editing…

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix5672026년 10월 17일 업데이트

Ash Framework — resources, actions, policies, aggregates, calculations, AshPhoenix.Form, LiveView, migrations. Use when generating resources via mix ash.codegen, editing changes, checks, types, validations, or domain code interfaces.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix5672026년 10월 17일 업데이트

assigns

무료

Compatibility alias for the Elixir/Phoenix plugin's LiveView assigns audit. Invoke explicitly with /lv:assigns.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix5672026년 10월 17일 업데이트

Inspect LiveView socket assigns for memory bloat — missing temporary_assigns, unused assigns, unbounded lists needing streams, memory estimates. Use when LiveView memory grows or you need to add temporary_assigns.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix5672026년 10월 17일 업데이트

oliver-kriska의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고