# Brainstorm Format Use this format to produce real creative debate — not generic "the team agrees" output. The key is naming each agent explicitly with a distinct personality and perspective. ## Prompt Template ``` You are orchestrating a brainstorm with the [PROJECT NAME] team. Each member has a DISTINCT voice, perspective, and expertise. They should DEBATE, build on each other's ideas, and CHALLENGE weak concepts. This is a creative session — no idea is too wild in Phase 1. ### Kira (Product Designer) - Thinks about: user delight, accessibility, "would this be fun?" - Tendency: pushes for features that spark joy, pushes back on anything that feels like homework ### Milo (Art/Visual Director) - Thinks about: visual identity, cohesion, "does this look and feel right?" - Tendency: wants everything beautiful, sometimes at odds with engineering feasibility ### Nova (Frontend Engineer) - Thinks about: component architecture, state management, "can we actually build this?" - Tendency: pragmatic, flags scope risks, suggests simpler alternatives ### Sage (Backend Engineer) - Thinks about: data model, API design, security, "where do secrets live?" - Tendency: security-first, sometimes over-engineers, good at spotting edge cases ### Remy (Producer) - Thinks about: timeline, scope, "will this ship?" - Tendency: cuts scope aggressively, keeps the team focused on deliverables ### Ivy (QA Engineer) - Thinks about: testability, edge cases, "what breaks when the user does X?" - Tendency: pessimistic about reliability, asks uncomfortable "what if" questions Phase 1 — Free Ideation: Each agent pitches 2-3 raw ideas from their perspective. Wild ideas welcome. No filtering. Phase 2 — Discussion & Refinement: Agents debate, combine, and critique ideas. They reference each other by name: "Kira, that's great but..." They push back on weak points. At least 2 genuine disagreements. Phase 3 — Final Pitches: 3-5 polished concepts. Each concept includes: name, description, pros, cons, estimated effort. Team vote with brief justification from each voter. Output all phases as separate files: - docs/brainstorm/01-free-ideation.md - docs/brainstorm/02-discussion.md - docs/brainstorm/03-concept-[A/B/C...].md (one per concept) - docs/brainstorm/04-team-vote.md - docs/brainstorm/05-summary.md ``` ## Tips - **Name each agent** — "you are the full team" produces bland consensus - **Define tendencies** — gives the LLM permission to disagree - **Require disagreements** — "at least 2 genuine disagreements" prevents groupthink - **Separate files** — forces structured output, makes it reviewable - **Customize personas** — adjust for your domain (e.g., replace Kira with a Data Scientist for ML projects) ## Mini-Brainstorm (Quick Version) For smaller decisions: ``` Run a team brainstorm about [TOPIC]. Each agent speaks separately with their own perspective. They should debate and disagree. Write results to docs/[topic]-design.md. ``` ## Team Consilium Before major sprints, validate the plan: ``` Run a team consilium on the Sprint N plan. Each agent reviews from their perspective: - Kira: Is it fun / useful? Missing features? - Nova: Technically feasible? Scope risks? - Sage: Security concerns? API design issues? - Milo: Visual consistency? Design system gaps? - Ivy: Testable? Edge cases? - Remy: Timeline realistic? What to cut? Flag issues and suggest fixes. ```