oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix-phx-brainstorm
Brainstorm Elixir/Phoenix features — explore ideas, compare; Use when vague idea, not sure how to approach, or want…
npx skills add https://github.com/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix --skill phx-brainstorm
Interactive interview → research → synthesis loop. Produces structured
interview.md that $elixir-phoenix:phx-plan detects and consumes (skipping clarification).
$elixir-phoenix:phx-brainstorm Add some kind of notification system
$elixir-phoenix:phx-brainstorm Improve authentication security
$elixir-phoenix:phx-brainstorm # starts with open question
$elixir-phoenix:phx-brainstorm {topic}
|
v
[INTERVIEW] ←──────────────────┐
| |
v (sufficient OR user exit) |
[DECISION POINT] |
├─ Research ──→ [RESEARCH] ─┘
├─ Continue interview ──────┘
├─ Make a plan ──→ STOP (suggest $elixir-phoenix:phx-plan {slug})
├─ Store & exit ──→ STOP (artifacts saved)
└─ Discuss ──→ freeform ──→ [DECISION POINT]
Create .claude/plans/{slug}/ directory. Start asking ONE question at a time.
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.
| Dim | Target | Sufficient signal |
|-----|--------|-------------------|
| What | Specific behavior/features | Concrete verbs, not "some kind of" |
| Why | Problem solved, user need | Clear benefit stated |
| Scope | In/out boundaries | Explicit exclusions stated |
| Where | Modules, contexts, pages | File paths or context names mentioned |
| How | Approach, constraints | At least one concrete constraint |
| Edge | Error states, scale, auth | 2+ edge cases identified |
Interview is "sufficient" when total score >= 8 out of 12.
Before each question, run a brief codebase scan on topics the user mentioned:
MANDATORY: Write interview.md FIRST, then use AskUserQuestion.
Never let the conversation flow past this point without a formal choice.
.claude/plans/{slug}/interview.mdhard limit; the auto-added "Other" covers freeform discussion):
$elixir-phoenix:phx-plan .claude/plans/{slug}/interview.mdAskUserQuestion 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.
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:
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.
$elixir-phoenix:phx-plan — always present as option, let user chooseinterview.md is the contract with $elixir-phoenix:phx-planThis is the most critical law. After interview, after research, after discuss — ALWAYS
present options via AskUserQuestion. Never let conversation skip the checkpoint
User picks "More research" to go deeper, not the skill
$elixir-phoenix:phx-brainstorm ──→ interview.md ──→ $elixir-phoenix:phx-plan (skips clarification)
──→ $elixir-phoenix:phx-plan --existing (deepens)
──→ stored for later session
Position: optional upstream of $elixir-phoenix:phx-plan in workflow cycle.
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
Take oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix-phx-brainstorm from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal
use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.
The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the
same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.