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.
npx skills add https://github.com/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix --skill phx-brainstorm
Interactive interview → research → synthesis loop. Produces structured
interview.md that phx-plan detects and consumes (skipping clarification).
phx-brainstorm Add some kind of notification system
phx-brainstorm Improve authentication security
phx-brainstorm # starts with open question
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]
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):
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.
phx-plan — always present as option, let user chooseinterview.md is the contract with 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
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/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
Guide users through a structured workflow for co-authoring documentation. Use when user wants to write documentation, proposals, technical specs, decision docs, or similar structured content. This workflow helps users efficiently transfer context, refine content through iteration, and verify the doc works for readers. Trigger when user mentions writing docs, creating proposals, drafting specs, or similar documentation tasks.
Intelligently organizes your files and folders across your computer by understanding context, finding duplicates, suggesting better structures, and automating cleanup tasks. Reduces cognitive load and keeps your digital workspace tidy without manual effort.
Generates creative domain name ideas for your project and checks availability across multiple TLDs (.com, .io, .dev, .ai, etc.). Saves hours of brainstorming and manual checking.
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
Implements Manus-style file-based planning for complex tasks. Creates task_plan.md, findings.md, and progress.md. Use when starting complex multi-step tasks, research projects, or any task requiring >5 tool calls.
Creative research ideation and exploration. Use for open-ended brainstorming sessions, exploring interdisciplinary connections, challenging assumptions, or identifying research gaps. Best for early-stage research planning when you do not have specific observations yet. For formulating testable hypotheses from data use hypothesis-generation.
Comprehensive GitHub project management with swarm-coordinated issue tracking, project board automation, and sprint planning
Interview the user relentlessly about a plan or design until reaching shared understanding, resolving each branch of the decision tree. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan, get grilled on their design, or mentions "grill me".
Take oliver-kriska/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.