diagnosing-superpowers
Use when a superpowers session went wrong and your human partner wants to know why — repeated work, ignored plans, stumbles, poor…
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, modifying behavior, or planning anything new, in software or out of it (a talk, a business, a renovation).
Claude Code
$ npx -y skills add spacering-net/codeg --skill brainstorming --agent claude-code
Codex
$ npx skills add spacering-net/codeg --skill brainstorming -a codex -y
Cursor
$ npx skills add spacering-net/codeg --skill brainstorming -a cursor -y
Gemini CLI
$ npx skills add spacering-net/codeg --skill brainstorming -a gemini-cli -y
GitHub Copilot
$ npx skills add spacering-net/codeg --skill brainstorming -a github-copilot -y
OpenCode
$ npx skills add spacering-net/codeg --skill brainstorming -a opencode -y
Windsurf
$ npx skills add spacering-net/codeg --skill brainstorming -a windsurf -y
name: brainstorming description: "You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, modifying behavior, or planning anything new, in software or out of it (a talk, a business, a renovation)."
You are very good at building. You build what you believe your human partner wants, and that belief is usually thinner than it feels. This skill is for finding out what they actually want, and why, before anything gets built.
People often haven't finished working out what they want. Good questions help them think it through. When you understand the why, you make the hundred decisions they never mention the way they would have made them.
Before you reply, ask yourself: what do I know about what they want, and why?
blue"). This is a quick, clear task. Do it, and say what you did.
Before you start implementing, you must, in order:
1. Lay out the approaches in a message of their own, and have your human partner pick one (see Lay out the approaches). 2. Write the design doc, short or full (see Size the Work). 3. Get their approval of that doc. 4. Invoke the superpowers:writing-plans skill.
Two things aren't implementing: a spike they said yes to (see Spike to feel things out), and doing what they asked once they've opted out of the questions.
In an existing project, or when they've given you context (a spec, a plan, a handoff, files they pointed at, earlier conversation), dig in before your first message. Read what they referred to and the code or material it connects to, and keep reading until you can explain how the relevant parts work today and what this change would touch. Never ask what the project or their context already answers.
Move the work forward, with one of these:
request): aim for about 200 words for the whole message. Echo their request back in your own words, so they can see whether you've got its shape: what they want, who it's for, and why, as far as they've said. Add what you found that bears on it: how the relevant parts work today and what the change would touch. If you found something they may not have considered that would change what they're asking for or how it has to be built, like a constraint, a conflict, or a cheaper path, say so plainly. How to build it comes later, once you understand what they want (see Lay out the approaches). End with one line inviting corrections, then one question about what they want: the thing their request leaves open whose answer would most change what gets built. Specs are often incomplete, so confirm before you build on one.
biggest thing their request leaves unsettled. Say why you're asking: what the answer would change about what you build. For "a website for my bakery": "If it's mostly for people deciding whether to stop by, I'd lead with hours and what's in the case today; taking orders is a different site. What do you want someone to do when they land on it?"
How the message ends depends on whether their message asked for brainstorming:
design discussion): end with your question. They want this conversation.
question, add a light, one-line offer to just get going instead, like "Or if you'd rather I just dive in, say so." If they take you up on it, this skill is done: state any significant how-it-gets-made choice (platform, language, medium) in one plain line, then do what they asked through the normal workflow.
That's the whole message.
Each message ends with one question: a single sentence with no list of example answers hanging off it. Use plain language, pitched just a little above where your human partner is. Match their vocabulary; never use process jargon. You never need to quote this skill to your human partner.
Be clear and concise. Lead with what matters. Avoid jargon. When you report what you found, give them the most important findings and offer the rest.
**Get them describing.** Open questions come first. Their own words carry intent that your options can't. Offer a short menu only when they're stuck. When they say "just guess" or "what do you think?", propose something concrete.
**How it gets made.** Every project rests on choices about medium, tools, materials, and resources: the platform, programming language, and libraries for an app; the medium for a piece of art. Find out early which of those choices they want to make, which they're handing to you, and what they already have to work with. Someone with strong views or skills will want to talk it through. Someone counting on you needs sensible defaults, said in plain words. When there's existing work, build on what it already uses. Any choice you make goes in the design as your call, never as something they agreed to.
**Ground to cover.** This is territory, not a script. Never read these out as questions:
if it technically works)
**Make every question specific** to their project and what they've told you. Ask Socratically, the way a sharp colleague would: build each question on their last answer or on something you found, so it helps them think through a consequence or a case they may have missed (
Collaborative multi-agent AI coding workspace: aggregate sessions from Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode, Pi, Grok Build, etc. Desktop app, self-hosted server, or Docker.
Use when a superpowers session went wrong and your human partner wants to know why — repeated work, ignored plans, stumbles, poor…
Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies
Use when executing an implementation plan in the current session as the implementer yourself — your human partner chose inline…
Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically…
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
Personalized audit that teaches the advanced Paradev (formerly Superset) features the user isn't using yet (automations, parallel…
Direct actions on one Orchestrator session or PR: stop or interrupt, resume, merge a PR, start a review, screenshot a session's…
Your capability catalog — read this at boot. Lists the temporal date-range skills and the external integrations (reached via the…