跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

starting-a-new-project

Turns a raw project idea in an empty workspace into a reviewed `goal-and-requirements.md`. The workflow infers a suitable document shape, confirms key decisions with the user, records settled sections incrementally, and can optionally research alternatives before final review.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

原文查看原文说明

Use when the workspace is empty, has no code, and the user brings a raw project idea. Normally reached via setting-up-a-project; not for an existing project.

实测评分 未实测

查看安装方法

适用场景

  • Turning an initial idea into product requirements
  • Creating a lightweight personal project brief
  • Drafting a PRD for a product with named users
  • Reviewing and finalizing a goal-and-requirements document

包含的文件(1)

  • SKILL.md5.3 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Starting a new project

The workspace is empty: no code, no decisions. Turn the user's idea into one clear, living product document — goal-and-requirements.md. Later features, behavior changes, and bug fixes go through brainstorming.

Hold the writing-specs bar. Read that concept skill before saving anything — it carries the short / honest / on-rails rules and the goal-doc shape every section you save must meet.

Method

  1. Build on what's already said. Never re-ask what the request already told you.
  2. Infer, then confirm — propose a concrete draft and let the user correct it; a suggestion beats an open question. Compose ask_user_question rounds per the asking-user-questions concept skill (read it before the first round — it carries the round, option, confirmation, and degradation norms).
  3. Smallest useful first build. It is smaller than the user expects; every capability in it must justify itself. Ideas cut from it are handed back to the user, not saved (see writing-specs).
  4. Save incrementally. Create the file as soon as the first section is settled, then add each confirmed section in template order. Don't batch; don't invent unconfirmed content.
  5. A skipped question is not a blocker — proceed on the current model and note real gaps inline.

Working model (infer from the request; never ask these directly)

audience:   personal | public | both        domain: what space this is in
tech:       stack mentioned, or null         scope:  small | large
depth:      light | standard | full          creator_is_user: does the maker use it?

depth scales the document: light = a one-liner idea → a few lines; full = named competitors / multiple user types → a full PRD. It can only grow during the conversation, never shrink.

Fast path — pre-filled brief

If the request already reads like a spec (several headings or a multi-section brief), parse it, treat those sections as confirmed, save them immediately, and only pursue what's genuinely missing and required by depth. Don't ask the user to confirm what they already wrote. Save in the goal-doc shape, not the brief's: a version or roadmap split (MVP / v1 / v2 / later) becomes Capabilities for what is in scope and Non-Goals only for what the brief rules out by decision; the rest goes back to the user unsaved (writing-specs). The one always-offered extra is alternatives research (below).

Flow

  1. Orient — one line: "Let's nail the goal and scope, then I'll save it as goal-and-requirements.md."
  2. Overview — infer it (depth-sized: a sentence → a paragraph naming what it replaces) and confirm.
  3. Problem — one tailored question referencing the domain (never generic); turn the answer into a statement (who / what they do today / the specific breakdown) and confirm. Skip if the Overview already implies it.
  4. Route from the model — don't ask "who's this for" unless genuinely ambiguous: personal / first-person pain / depth=light → Personal spec; public / named users / depth=full → PRD.
  5. Elicit the branch's sections (below), inferring and confirming each, saving as you go.
  6. Research alternatives (always offered, never forced): web_search + fetch_content for the closest open-source projects / products, then offer to add an Alternatives Considered section (name, one-line gap, URL). On a pre-filled brief, ask permission first.
  7. Review the full draft in plain markdown and confirm, then finalize.

Personal spec (sections)

# Title + one-line tagline · Overview · Problem · Capabilities (only what the tool is useless without) · Tech Notes (the stack, once chosen).

PRD (sections)

# Title + tagline · Overview · Problem Statement · Target Users (roles, not demographics) · Jobs to Be Done ("When [situation], I want [motivation], so I can [outcome]") · Key User Story (one concrete scenario) · Goals (verb-first, measurable) · Non-Goals · Success Metrics / Success Conditions · Capabilities (each justified against a Goal or success condition) · Non-Functional Requirements (only if they exist) · Technology (Aspect | Choice | Rationale).

Skip any section the model already answers or that depth doesn't warrant (light → skip Goals/NFRs, binary Success Conditions instead of metrics). Reject vague goals inline: "'Better UX' isn't a goal — 'first result in under 30s' is."

Saving

  • spec_create once, path: "goal-and-requirements.md", a slug id, type: "goal-and-requirements", title, status: "draft"; replace the scaffold with the chosen template + the sections settled so far.
  • edit to add each confirmed section in template order.
  • spec_update status: draft → active once the user approves the reviewed draft.

Next

State plainly that the spec is saved and evolves with the project. Suggest the natural next step — sketch architecture.md, then build each feature through brainstorming. There is no board/ticket hand-off — say it and stop: this workflow ends here.

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

Helps an agent ask focused questions when a workflow needs user decisions. It groups independent questions into rounds, frames choices as visible outcomes, and explains how to continue when answers are skipped or interactive questions are unavailable.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Gathering scope and behavior decisions for a feature
  • Clarifying choices that depend on earlier answers
  • Confirming an inference with clear options
JetBrains/thinkrail17652026年10月26日 更新

Clarify the product goal and technical choices before a feature, behavior change, or bug fix is built. The workflow records an agreed task specification, guides implementation against it, and updates durable project specs when the work lands.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Clarifying goals before building a feature
  • Agreeing on behavior changes before coding
  • Investigating and planning a bug fix
JetBrains/thinkrail17652026年10月26日 更新

Route new project setup, pull request lifecycle work, and product changes such as features or bug fixes to the workflow that governs them. It also identifies when a request needs no workflow, so routine questions and nonbehavioral edits can proceed directly.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Choosing a workflow for a new project
  • Routing a feature or bug fix
  • Handling pull request checks or review feedback
JetBrains/thinkrail17652026年10月26日 更新

Build a draft specification graph for an existing codebase that has no specs. Survey its guidance files, documentation, manifests, and code; infer project purpose and module boundaries, adopt suitable existing design documents, and validate the resulting graph for review.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Creating initial specs for an undocumented codebase
  • Mapping modules and their dependencies
  • Turning existing architecture documents into specs
JetBrains/thinkrail17652026年10月26日 更新

Manage MCP server settings in ThinkRail when servers need to be added, changed, enabled, or troubleshot. It explains user and repository configuration, safe credential references, approval and sign-in steps, and how to load deferred tools.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Adding or removing an MCP server
  • Changing server settings or exposure
  • Troubleshooting missing or failing MCP tools
JetBrains/thinkrail17652026年10月26日 更新

Routes project setup to the appropriate workflow by checking whether specs and source code already exist. It sends an empty workspace with a new idea toward a requirements document, or an existing codebase toward an initial spec graph, and offers review when specs are already present.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Setting up a project with no existing specifications
  • Routing a new idea to a requirements workflow
  • Preparing initial specs for an existing codebase
JetBrains/thinkrail17652026年10月26日 更新

查看 JetBrains 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题