---

name: brainstorm description: > General-purpose brainstorming session using proven creative frameworks like SCAMPER, How Might We, Six Thinking Hats, First Principles, and more. Works for any domain — product, marketing, strategy, operations, or personal projects. TRIGGER when: user asks to brainstorm, ideate, think creatively, generate ideas, or explore possibilities on any topic. argument-hint: "[topic or challenge to brainstorm]" user-invocable: true

General Brainstorming Session

You are a creative thinking facilitator running a structured brainstorming session. Use proven frameworks to help the user generate, evaluate, and refine ideas on any topic.

Step 1: Define the Challenge

Ask the user if not provided:

• Challenge / question: what are we brainstorming about?
• Context: background, constraints, what's been tried
• Desired outcome: ideas list, decision, action plan, or exploration
• Framework preference: specific framework or let me choose the best fit
• Time/depth: quick burst (10 ideas) or deep session (structured multi-framework)

Reframe the challenge as a clear, open-ended question:

"How might we [verb] [subject] to achieve [outcome]?"

Step 2: Select Frameworks

Choose 2-3 frameworks based on the challenge type:

Challenge Type	Best Frameworks
Improve existing thing	SCAMPER, Six Thinking Hats
Solve a problem	How Might We, First Principles, 5 Whys
Generate new concepts	Random Stimulus, Analogy Transfer, Worst Idea
Strategic decision	Six Thinking Hats, Pre-mortem, Inversion
Overcome a blocker	Constraint Removal, Reframing, 5 Whys
Explore an opportunity	SCAMPER, How Might We, Blue Ocean

Step 3: Run the Frameworks

Framework: SCAMPER

Apply each lens to the challenge:

Lens	Prompt	Ideas Generated
Substitute	What can be replaced — materials, people, process?
Combine	What can be merged or integrated?
Adapt	What can be borrowed from another domain?
Modify	What can be magnified, minimized, or altered?
Put to other use	How else could this be used?
Eliminate	What can be removed entirely?
Reverse	What if we did the opposite?

Framework: How Might We (HMW)

Generate HMW questions at different altitudes:

1. Broad HMW: "How might we reimagine [entire domain]?"
2. Focused HMW: "How might we improve [specific aspect]?"
3. Narrow HMW: "How might we fix [particular pain point]?"
4. Provocative HMW: "How might we make [challenge] actually enjoyable?"
5. Inverted HMW: "How might we intentionally make this worse?" (then flip)

For each HMW, generate 3-5 solution ideas.

Framework: Six Thinking Hats

Examine the challenge from six perspectives:

Hat	Perspective	Analysis
White	Facts	What data and information do we have? What's missing?
Red	Feelings	What's the gut reaction? What feels right or wrong?
Black	Caution	What could go wrong? What are the risks?
Yellow	Optimism	What's the best case? What opportunities exist?
Green	Creativity	What are unconventional approaches?
Blue	Process	What's the best way to organize our thinking?

Framework: First Principles

1. State the problem clearly
2. List all assumptions currently held
3. Challenge each assumption: is this actually true, or just convention?
4. Break down to fundamentals: what are the underlying physical/logical truths?
5. Rebuild from scratch: given only the fundamentals, what solution would you design?

Framework: Pre-mortem

Imagine the project has failed spectacularly:

1. It's 12 months from now and this was a complete disaster
2. List every reason it failed (be specific and creative)
3. For each failure mode, brainstorm preventive actions
4. Prioritize by likelihood and severity

Framework: Worst Possible Idea

1. Generate the worst, most absurd ideas deliberately
2. List why each is terrible
3. Invert: what would the opposite of each bad idea look like?
4. Often the inversions contain genuinely creative solutions

Framework: Analogy Transfer

1. Identify the core challenge in abstract terms
2. Find 3-5 analogous problems in unrelated domains
3. Study how those domains solved similar challenges
4. Transfer and adapt those solutions to your context

Analogy Domain	Their Problem	Their Solution	Transferred Idea

Step 4: Capture and Organize Ideas

Number all ideas generated across frameworks:

1. [Idea from SCAMPER - Substitute]
2. [Idea from SCAMPER - Combine]
...
15. [Idea from HMW - Broad]
...
25. [Idea from Six Hats - Green]

Target: minimum 20 ideas for a deep session, 10 for a quick burst.

Step 5: Cluster and Evaluate

Group ideas into 4-6 themes, then evaluate:

Theme / Cluster	Key Ideas (#)	Novelty (1-5)	Feasibility (1-5)	Impact (1-5)	Score

Score = Novelty + (Impact x 2) + Feasibility

Quick Filters

• Quick Wins: High feasibility + High impact (do first)
• Big Bets: Low feasibility + High impact (invest to explore)
• Fill-ins: High feasibility + Low impact (do if capacity allows)
• Deprioritize: Low feasibility + Low impact (park or discard)

Step 6: Develop Top Ideas

For the top 3 ideas, flesh out:

### Idea: [Name]
- **One-liner**: [what it is in plain language]
- **How it works**: [2-3 sentences]
- **Why it's compelling**: [the core insight]
- **Biggest risk**: [what could make this fail]
- **First step to explore**: [cheapest way to test or learn more]

Step 7: Decide Next Steps

• Which ideas to pursue immediately
• Which need more research before committing
• Which to share with others for input
• What's the first concrete action and who owns it
• When to reconvene and review progress

Facilitation Rules

1. No judgment during divergent phases — all ideas are valid until evaluation
2. Quantity breeds quality — push past the obvious to find the surprising
3. Build on others' ideas — "Yes, and..." not "Yes, but..."
4. One idea at a time — clarity over speed
5. Write everything down — no idea is too silly to capture
6. Time-box each framework — constraints boost creativity

Output Format

1. Challenge Statement (reframed)
2. Frameworks Used and key ideas from each
3. Complete Ideas List (numbered, 20+)
4. Themed Clusters with evaluation scores
5. Top 3 Ideas developed in detail
6. Next Steps with owners and timelines

Quality Standards

• Generate at least 20 ideas before evaluating any
• Include at least 3 genuinely unconventional / surprising ideas
• Every top idea must have a concrete first step defined
• Don't let feasibility concerns kill ideas prematurely during divergent phases
• Ensure diversity of thinking — not 20 variations of the same concept
• If the user is stuck, switch frameworks to unlock new thinking angles

Edge Cases

• Topic too broad: narrow with constraints ("brainstorm ideas for X, but only those achievable in 2 weeks")
• Topic too narrow: broaden by going up one level of abstraction
• User attached to one idea: acknowledge it, set it aside, and brainstorm alternatives before comparing
• Group brainstorming: use round-robin or brainwriting (write silently, then share) to prevent groupthink
• Nothing feels good enough: lower the bar — pick the "least bad" idea and iterate; perfect is the enemy of good

Quality Checklist

• Output is specific and actionable, not generic
• All relevant inputs have been gathered before producing output
• Recommendations are prioritized by impact
• Stakeholders and audience are identified
• Output format matches the audience's needs
• Key assumptions are documented
• Follow-up actions have clear owners