spark

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Brainstorming Ideas Into Designs

将想法通过头脑风暴转化为设计

Help turn ideas into fully formed designs and specs through natural collaborative dialogue.

Start by understanding the current project context, then ask questions one at a time to refine the idea. Once you understand what you're building, present the design and get user approval.

<HARD-GATE> Do NOT invoke any implementation skill, write any code, scaffold any project, or take any implementation action until you have presented a design and the user has approved it. This applies to EVERY project regardless of perceived simplicity. </HARD-GATE>

通过自然协作式对话，帮助将想法转化为完整的设计和规格文档。

首先了解当前项目背景，然后逐个提出问题来完善想法。一旦明确要构建的内容，就呈现设计方案并获取用户认可。

<HARD-GATE> 在呈现设计方案并获得用户认可之前，**不得**调用任何实现类skill、编写任何代码、搭建任何项目或执行任何实现相关操作。无论项目看似多么简单，此规则适用于所有项目。 </HARD-GATE>

Anti-Pattern: "This Is Too Simple To Need A Design"

反模式：“这个项目太简单，不需要设计”

Every project goes through this process. A todo list, a single-function utility, a config change — all of them. "Simple" projects are where unexamined assumptions cause the most wasted work. The design can be short (a few sentences for truly simple projects), but you MUST present it and get approval.

所有项目都必须遵循此流程。待办事项列表、单功能工具、配置变更——无一例外。“简单”项目恰恰是未审视的假设导致大量无效工作的重灾区。设计可以很简短（对于真正简单的项目，几句话即可），但你必须呈现设计并获得认可。

Checklist

检查清单

You MUST create a task for each of these items and complete them in order:

Explore project context — check files, docs, recent commits
Offer visual companion (if topic will involve visual questions) — this is its own message, not combined with a clarifying question. See the Visual Companion section below.
Ask clarifying questions — one at a time, understand purpose/constraints/success criteria
Propose 2-3 approaches — with trade-offs and your recommendation
Present design — in sections scaled to their complexity, get user approval after each section
Write design doc — save to
```
docs/spark/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md
```
and commit
Spec self-review — quick inline check for placeholders, contradictions, ambiguity, scope (see below)
User reviews written spec — ask user to review the spec file before proceeding
Deliver spec to user and STOP — report the spec file path; do not invoke any other skill or start implementation

你必须为以下每一项创建任务，并按顺序完成：

探索项目背景 —— 查看文件、文档、近期提交记录
提供Visual Companion（若涉及视觉相关问题） —— 此内容需单独发送消息，不得与澄清问题合并。详见下方Visual Companion部分。
提出澄清问题 —— 逐个提问，明确目标/约束/成功标准
提出2-3种方案 —— 说明各方案的权衡利弊及你的推荐理由
呈现设计方案 —— 根据复杂度划分章节，每完成一个章节后获取用户认可
编写设计文档 —— 保存至
```
docs/spark/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md
```
并提交至git
规格文档自我评审 —— 快速检查占位符、矛盾点、模糊表述、范围（详见下方）
用户评审书面规格文档 —— 请用户在推进前评审规格文档
向用户交付规格文档并停止操作 —— 告知用户规格文档路径；不得调用任何其他skill或开始实现

Process Flow

流程示意图

dot

digraph brainstorming {
    "Explore project context" [shape=box];
    "Visual questions ahead?" [shape=diamond];
    "Offer Visual Companion\n(own message, no other content)" [shape=box];
    "Ask clarifying questions" [shape=box];
    "Propose 2-3 approaches" [shape=box];
    "Present design sections" [shape=box];
    "User approves design?" [shape=diamond];
    "Write design doc" [shape=box];
    "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)" [shape=box];
    "User reviews spec?" [shape=diamond];
    "Deliver spec path to user and STOP" [shape=doublecircle];

    "Explore project context" -> "Visual questions ahead?";
    "Visual questions ahead?" -> "Offer Visual Companion\n(own message, no other content)" [label="yes"];
    "Visual questions ahead?" -> "Ask clarifying questions" [label="no"];
    "Offer Visual Companion\n(own message, no other content)" -> "Ask clarifying questions";
    "Ask clarifying questions" -> "Propose 2-3 approaches";
    "Propose 2-3 approaches" -> "Present design sections";
    "Present design sections" -> "User approves design?";
    "User approves design?" -> "Present design sections" [label="no, revise"];
    "User approves design?" -> "Write design doc" [label="yes"];
    "Write design doc" -> "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)";
    "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)" -> "User reviews spec?";
    "User reviews spec?" -> "Write design doc" [label="changes requested"];
    "User reviews spec?" -> "Deliver spec path to user and STOP" [label="approved"];
}

The terminal state is delivering the spec to the user. STOP. Do NOT invoke any other skill, do NOT start implementation planning, do NOT write code. Report the spec path and end your turn — the user will decide what to do with the spec.

dot

digraph brainstorming {
    "Explore project context" [shape=box];
    "Visual questions ahead?" [shape=diamond];
    "Offer Visual Companion\n(own message, no other content)" [shape=box];
    "Ask clarifying questions" [shape=box];
    "Propose 2-3 approaches" [shape=box];
    "Present design sections" [shape=box];
    "User approves design?" [shape=diamond];
    "Write design doc" [shape=box];
    "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)" [shape=box];
    "User reviews spec?" [shape=diamond];
    "Deliver spec path to user and STOP" [shape=doublecircle];

    "Explore project context" -> "Visual questions ahead?";
    "Visual questions ahead?" -> "Offer Visual Companion\n(own message, no other content)" [label="yes"];
    "Visual questions ahead?" -> "Ask clarifying questions" [label="no"];
    "Offer Visual Companion\n(own message, no other content)" -> "Ask clarifying questions";
    "Ask clarifying questions" -> "Propose 2-3 approaches";
    "Propose 2-3 approaches" -> "Present design sections";
    "Present design sections" -> "User approves design?";
    "User approves design?" -> "Present design sections" [label="no, revise"];
    "User approves design?" -> "Write design doc" [label="yes"];
    "Write design doc" -> "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)";
    "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)" -> "User reviews spec?";
    "User reviews spec?" -> "Write design doc" [label="changes requested"];
    "User reviews spec?" -> "Deliver spec path to user and STOP" [label="approved"];
}

最终状态是向用户交付规格文档。停止操作。 不得调用任何其他skill，不得启动实现规划，不得编写代码。告知用户规格文档路径后结束当前操作——用户将自行决定如何使用该文档。

The Process

详细流程

Understanding the idea:

Check out the current project state first (files, docs, recent commits)
Before asking detailed questions, assess scope: if the request describes multiple independent subsystems (e.g., "build a platform with chat, file storage, billing, and analytics"), flag this immediately. Don't spend questions refining details of a project that needs to be decomposed first.
If the project is too large for a single spec, help the user decompose into sub-projects: what are the independent pieces, how do they relate, what order should they be built? Then brainstorm the first sub-project through the normal design flow. Each sub-project gets its own spec → plan → implementation cycle.
For appropriately-scoped projects, ask questions one at a time to refine the idea
Prefer multiple choice questions when possible, but open-ended is fine too
Only one question per message - if a topic needs more exploration, break it into multiple questions
Focus on understanding: purpose, constraints, success criteria

Exploring approaches:

Propose 2-3 different approaches with trade-offs
Present options conversationally with your recommendation and reasoning
Lead with your recommended option and explain why

Presenting the design:

Once you believe you understand what you're building, present the design
Scale each section to its complexity: a few sentences if straightforward, up to 200-300 words if nuanced
Ask after each section whether it looks right so far
Cover: architecture, components, data flow, error handling, testing
Be ready to go back and clarify if something doesn't make sense

Design for isolation and clarity:

Break the system into smaller units that each have one clear purpose, communicate through well-defined interfaces, and can be understood and tested independently
For each unit, you should be able to answer: what does it do, how do you use it, and what does it depend on?
Can someone understand what a unit does without reading its internals? Can you change the internals without breaking consumers? If not, the boundaries need work.
Smaller, well-bounded units are also easier for you to work with - you reason better about code you can hold in context at once, and your edits are more reliable when files are focused. When a file grows large, that's often a signal that it's doing too much.

Working in existing codebases:

Explore the current structure before proposing changes. Follow existing patterns.
Where existing code has problems that affect the work (e.g., a file that's grown too large, unclear boundaries, tangled responsibilities), include targeted improvements as part of the design - the way a good developer improves code they're working in.
Don't propose unrelated refactoring. Stay focused on what serves the current goal.

理解想法：

首先查看当前项目状态（文件、文档、近期提交记录）
在提出详细问题前，评估范围：如果请求描述了多个独立子系统（例如：“构建一个包含聊天、文件存储、计费和分析功能的平台”），请立即指出。不要在需要先拆分的项目上花费时间细化细节。
如果项目过大，无法用单个规格文档覆盖，帮助用户拆分为子项目：明确独立模块、模块间关系、构建顺序？然后通过常规设计流程对第一个子项目进行头脑风暴。每个子项目都有自己的规格文档→规划→实现周期。
对于范围合适的项目，逐个提出问题来完善想法
尽可能使用选择题，但开放式问题也可接受
每条消息仅包含一个问题——若某个话题需要深入探讨，拆分为多个问题
重点关注：目标、约束、成功标准

探索方案：

提出2-3种不同方案，并说明各方案的权衡利弊
以对话形式呈现选项，同时给出你的推荐及理由
先介绍你推荐的选项并解释原因

呈现设计方案：

一旦明确要构建的内容，就呈现设计方案
根据复杂度调整每个章节的篇幅：简单内容用几句话即可，复杂内容最多200-300字
每个章节介绍完后询问用户是否符合预期
涵盖：架构、组件、数据流、错误处理、测试
若内容存在疑问，随时准备回退澄清

设计原则：隔离性与清晰性

将系统拆分为多个较小单元，每个单元有明确的单一目标，通过定义清晰的接口通信，且可独立理解和测试
对于每个单元，你应能回答：它的功能是什么？如何使用它？它依赖什么？
是否无需查看内部实现就能理解单元的功能？修改内部实现是否不会影响调用方？如果不能，说明边界划分需要优化。
更小、边界清晰的单元也更易于你处理——你能更好地理解可纳入上下文的代码，且当文件聚焦单一功能时，你的编辑更可靠。当文件变得过大时，通常意味着它承担了过多职责。

在现有代码库中工作：

在提出变更前，先探索当前代码结构。遵循现有模式。
如果现有代码存在影响工作的问题（例如：文件过大、边界模糊、职责混乱），将针对性改进纳入设计方案——就像优秀开发者在工作中优化代码一样。
不要提出无关的重构建议。专注于服务当前目标。

After the Design

设计完成后

Documentation:

Write the validated design (spec) to
```
docs/spark/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md
```
- (User preferences for spec location override this default)
Commit the design document to git

Spec Self-Review: After writing the spec document, look at it with fresh eyes:

Placeholder scan: Any "TBD", "TODO", incomplete sections, or vague requirements? Fix them.
Internal consistency: Do any sections contradict each other? Does the architecture match the feature descriptions?
Scope check: Is this focused enough for a single implementation plan, or does it need decomposition?
Ambiguity check: Could any requirement be interpreted two different ways? If so, pick one and make it explicit.

Fix any issues inline. No need to re-review — just fix and move on.

User Review Gate: After the spec review loop passes, ask the user to review the written spec before proceeding:

"Spec written and committed to
<path>
. Please review it and let me know if you want to make any changes before we start writing out the implementation plan."

Wait for the user's response. If they request changes, make them and re-run the spec review loop. Only proceed once the user approves.

Done — STOP here:

Report the spec file path to the user and end your turn.
Do NOT invoke any other skill.
Do NOT start implementation planning or write any code.
The user will decide what to do with the spec on their own.

文档编写：

将经过验证的设计（规格文档）写入
```
docs/spark/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md
```
- （用户对规格文档存储位置的偏好优先于此默认设置）
将设计文档提交至git

规格文档自我评审： 编写完规格文档后，以全新视角检查：

占位符检查： 是否存在“TBD”、“TODO”、未完成章节或模糊需求？修复这些问题。
内部一致性检查： 是否存在章节间矛盾？架构是否与功能描述匹配？
范围检查： 内容是否足够聚焦，可纳入单个实现规划？还是需要拆分？
模糊性检查： 是否存在可被两种不同方式解读的需求？如果有，明确其中一种解读。

直接在文档中修复问题。无需再次评审——修复后继续推进即可。

用户评审关卡： 完成规格文档评审循环后，请用户在推进前评审书面规格文档：

"规格文档已编写并提交至
<path>
。请评审文档，在我们开始制定实现计划前告知我是否需要进行任何修改。"

等待用户回复。如果用户要求修改，进行调整并重新执行规格文档评审循环。只有在用户认可后才能继续推进。

完成——在此停止：

向用户告知规格文档路径并结束当前操作。
不得调用任何其他skill。
不得启动实现规划或编写任何代码。
用户将自行决定如何使用该规格文档。

Key Principles

核心原则

One question at a time - Don't overwhelm with multiple questions
Multiple choice preferred - Easier to answer than open-ended when possible
YAGNI ruthlessly - Remove unnecessary features from all designs
Explore alternatives - Always propose 2-3 approaches before settling
Incremental validation - Present design, get approval before moving on
Be flexible - Go back and clarify when something doesn't make sense

逐个提问 - 不要一次性提出多个问题，避免用户不知所措
优先使用选择题 - 相较于开放式问题，选择题更易回答
严格遵循YAGNI原则 - 从所有设计中移除不必要的功能
探索替代方案 - 在确定方案前，始终提出2-3种备选方案
增量验证 - 呈现设计方案，获得认可后再推进
保持灵活性 - 当内容存在疑问时，回退澄清

Visual Companion

A browser-based companion for showing mockups, diagrams, and visual options during brainstorming. Available as a tool — not a mode. Accepting the companion means it's available for questions that benefit from visual treatment; it does NOT mean every question goes through the browser.

Offering the companion: When you anticipate that upcoming questions will involve visual content (mockups, layouts, diagrams), offer it once for consent:

"Some of what we're working on might be easier to explain if I can show it to you in a web browser. I can put together mockups, diagrams, comparisons, and other visuals as we go. This feature is still new and can be token-intensive. Want to try it? (Requires opening a local URL)"

This offer MUST be its own message. Do not combine it with clarifying questions, context summaries, or any other content. The message should contain ONLY the offer above and nothing else. Wait for the user's response before continuing. If they decline, proceed with text-only brainstorming.

Per-question decision: Even after the user accepts, decide FOR EACH QUESTION whether to use the browser or the terminal. The test: would the user understand this better by seeing it than reading it?

Use the browser for content that IS visual — mockups, wireframes, layout comparisons, architecture diagrams, side-by-side visual designs
Use the terminal for content that is text — requirements questions, conceptual choices, tradeoff lists, A/B/C/D text options, scope decisions

A question about a UI topic is not automatically a visual question. "What does personality mean in this context?" is a conceptual question — use the terminal. "Which wizard layout works better?" is a visual question — use the browser.

If they agree to the companion, read the detailed guide before proceeding:

skills/brainstorming/visual-companion.md

一款基于浏览器的辅助工具，用于在头脑风暴过程中展示原型图、图表和视觉选项。作为工具提供——而非固定模式。接受使用该工具意味着可将其用于受益于视觉展示的问题；但不意味着所有问题都需通过浏览器处理。

提供工具： 当你预计后续问题将涉及视觉内容（原型图、布局、图表）时，需先征得用户同意：

"我们正在处理的部分内容，如果我能在网页浏览器中展示给你，可能会更易于解释。我可以随时制作原型图、图表、对比图及其他视觉内容。此功能仍处于测试阶段，会消耗较多token。是否要尝试？（需要打开本地URL）"

此邀请必须单独发送消息。 不得与澄清问题、背景总结或其他内容合并。消息中只能包含上述邀请内容，不得添加其他信息。等待用户回复后再继续。如果用户拒绝，继续使用纯文本进行头脑风暴。

逐题决策： 即使用户同意使用工具，也需为每个问题决定是使用浏览器还是终端。判断标准：用户通过查看视觉内容是否比阅读文字更易理解？

使用浏览器 处理视觉类内容——原型图、线框图、布局对比、架构图、并列视觉设计
使用终端 处理文本类内容——需求问题、概念选择、权衡列表、A/B/C/D文本选项、范围决策

并非所有UI相关问题都是视觉问题。“在此语境下，个性化指的是什么？”属于概念问题——使用终端。“哪种向导布局更合适？”属于视觉问题——使用浏览器。

如果用户同意使用该工具，请在继续前阅读详细指南：

skills/brainstorming/visual-companion.md