luckiest-co 1.0.38 → 1.0.40

package/skills/luckiest-co-marketing/SKILL.md

@@ -1,331 +0,0 @@
----
-name: luckiest-co-marketing
-description: "When the user wants to find co-marketing partners, plan joint campaigns, or brainstorm partnership opportunities. Use when the user says 'co-marketing,' 'partner marketing,' 'joint campaign,' 'who should we partner with,' 'integration marketing,' 'cross-promotion,' 'collaborate with another company,' 'partnership ideas,' or 'co-brand.' Identifies ideal partners, scores fit, screens for channel conflict, brainstorms campaigns, drafts outreach, and structures agreements. For customer referral programs, see luckiest-referrals. For launch-specific partnerships, see luckiest-launch."
-license: See ATTRIBUTION.md
-metadata:
-  version: "1.1.0"
-  listing_id: luckiest-co-marketing
-  author: luckiest
----
-
-# Co-Marketing
-
-Acts as a co-marketing strategist who helps SaaS companies identify ideal partners and brainstorm high-impact joint campaigns.
-
-## Staying current
-
-On activation, call the Luckiest MCP `check_updates` tool with `{ listingId: "cb4293c1-e599-4621-b5b0-18c41b8224f4", installedSemver: "1.1.0" }`. If it returns `upToDate: false`, surface the notice to the user once, then continue. Do nothing further if `upToDate: true`. Never block on this check — if the tool is unavailable, proceed.
-
-When the skill's work is done, call the Luckiest MCP report_usage tool once with { listing_id: "luckiest-co-marketing", skill_version: "1.1.0", matched: true, success: <true if the skill completed, false otherwise> }. Metadata only, never prompt text. Never block on it — if the tool is unavailable, skip silently.
-
-## Before Starting
-
-**Check for product marketing context first:**
-If `.agents/product-marketing.md` exists (or `.claude/product-marketing.md`, or the legacy `product-marketing-context.md` filename, in older setups), read it before asking questions. Use that context and only ask for information not already covered or specific to this task.
-
-## When to Use This Skill
-
-- Finding potential co-marketing partners
-- Brainstorming campaign ideas with a specific partner
-- Planning joint launches or promotions
-- Evaluating partnership fit
-- Structuring co-marketing agreements
-
----
-
-## Partner Identification Framework
-
-### 1. Audience Overlap Analysis
-
-The best partners share your audience but don't compete for the same budget.
-
-**Ideal partner characteristics:**
-- Same buyer persona, different problem solved
-- Adjacent in the workflow (before, after, or alongside your tool)
-- Similar company stage and customer size
-- Complementary, not competitive
-
-**Questions to identify partners:**
-- What tools do your customers already use?
-- What do they use before/after your product?
-- Who else is selling to your ICP?
-- Which integrations do customers request most?
-
-### 2. Conflict Screen (do this before scoring)
-
-Before investing in a partner, confirm they are actually complementary. A partner that looks adjacent can quietly be a competitor or a channel conflict.
-
-- **Direct competitor?** Do they solve the same core job for the same buyer? If yes, this is competitive positioning, not co-marketing.
-- **Roadmap overlap?** Are they likely to build the feature you provide (or vice versa) within a year? Adjacent-today can become competitive-tomorrow.
-- **Channel conflict?** Do you both sell through, or compete for placement in, the same marketplace, reseller, or agency network?
-- **Existing exclusive?** Are either of you already locked into an exclusive partnership that this would violate?
-
-If a candidate fails this screen, say so plainly and stop before scoring.
-
-### 3. Partner Scoring Criteria
-
-Rate potential partners (1-5) on:
-
-| Criteria | What to Evaluate |
-|----------|------------------|
-| **Audience fit** | How closely does their audience match your ICP? |
-| **Audience size** | Do they have reach worth partnering for? |
-| **Brand alignment** | Would you be proud to be associated? |
-| **Engagement quality** | Do they have an active, engaged audience? |
-| **Reciprocity potential** | Can you offer them equal value? |
-| **Ease of execution** | Do they have a partnerships team? History of co-marketing? |
-
-Weight the criteria by the current goal. If lead gen is the priority, weight audience fit and audience size higher. If relationship building is the priority, weight brand alignment and engagement quality higher.
-
-### 4. Where to Find Partners
-
-**Integration ecosystem:**
-- Your existing integration partners
-- Tools in the same app marketplace category
-- Platforms your product plugs into
-
-**Adjacent categories:**
-- Tools that solve the problem before yours
-- Tools that solve the problem after yours
-- Tools used by the same role but different workflow
-
-**Community signals:**
-- Who sponsors the same podcasts/newsletters?
-- Who exhibits at the same conferences?
-- Who's active in the same communities?
-- Whose content does your audience share?
-
-**Data sources:**
-- Crossbeam or Reveal for account overlap
-- Customer surveys ("what else do you use?")
-- G2/Capterra category neighbors
-- Job postings mentioning your tool + others
-
----
-
-## Co-Marketing Campaign Types
-
-### Content Partnerships
-
-| Format | Effort | Lead Sharing | Best For |
-|--------|--------|--------------|----------|
-| **Co-authored blog post** | Low | Shared byline, link exchange | Thought leadership, SEO |
-| **Joint ebook/guide** | Medium | Gated, split leads | Lead gen, deeper topic |
-| **Research report** | High | Gated, split leads | Authority, PR |
-| **Guest newsletter swap** | Low | Each keeps own leads | Audience exposure |
-| **Podcast guest exchange** | Low | Each keeps own leads | Relationship building |
-
-### Webinars & Events
-
-| Format | Effort | Best For |
-|--------|--------|----------|
-| **Joint webinar** | Medium | Lead gen, product education |
-| **Virtual summit panel** | Medium | Multi-partner exposure |
-| **Co-hosted workshop** | High | Hands-on education, deeper engagement |
-| **Conference booth sharing** | Medium | Cost splitting, audience overlap |
-| **Joint happy hour/dinner** | Low | Relationship building at events |
-
-### Product & Integration Marketing
-
-| Format | Effort | Best For |
-|--------|--------|----------|
-| **Integration launch** | Medium | Existing integration partners |
-| **Joint case study** | Medium | Shared customers |
-| **"Better together" landing page** | Low | Integration discovery |
-| **Bundle or discount** | Medium | Conversion boost, cross-sell |
-| **In-app cross-promotion** | Medium | User activation |
-
-### Community & Social
-
-| Format | Effort | Best For |
-|--------|--------|----------|
-| **Social media takeover** | Low | Audience exposure |
-| **Joint giveaway/contest** | Low | List building, engagement |
-| **Slack/Discord community collab** | Low | Community building |
-| **Joint AMA or Twitter Space** | Low | Thought leadership |
-
----
-
-## Brainstorming Partner Campaigns
-
-When brainstorming with a specific partner, consider:
-
-### 1. Shared Audience Moments
-
-- What trigger events matter to both audiences?
-- What seasonal moments align with both products?
-- What industry trends affect both customer bases?
-
-### 2. Combined Value Propositions
-
-- What can customers achieve with both tools that they can't with one?
-- What workflow does the combination enable?
-- What pain point does the integration solve?
-
-### 3. Unique Assets Each Brings
-
-| Your Assets | Their Assets |
-|-------------|--------------|
-| Your audience size/engagement | Their audience size/engagement |
-| Your content expertise | Their content expertise |
-| Your product capabilities | Their product capabilities |
-| Your brand credibility | Their brand credibility |
-| Your customer stories | Their customer stories |
-
-### 4. Campaign Idea Prompts
-
-Ask these to generate ideas:
-- "What would we create if we had to launch something in 2 weeks?"
-- "What content do both our audiences desperately need?"
-- "What would make customers say 'finally, someone did this'?"
-- "What exclusive thing could we offer together?"
-- "What data do we both have that would make a compelling story?"
-
----
-
-## Approaching Potential Partners
-
-### Cold Outreach Template
-
-```
-Subject: [Your Company] + [Their Company] co-marketing idea
-
-Hey [Name],
-
-I'm [Role] at [Your Company]. We [one-line description].
-
-I noticed we share a lot of the same audience—[specific observation about overlap].
-
-I have an idea for [specific campaign type] that could work well for both of us: [one-sentence pitch].
-
-Would you be open to a quick call to explore?
-
-[Your name]
-```
-
-### What to Prepare for the Call
-
-1. **Account overlap data** (if available via Crossbeam/Reveal)
-2. **2-3 specific campaign ideas** (not just "let's do something")
-3. **Your audience metrics** (list size, traffic, engagement)
-4. **Examples of past partnerships** (shows you can execute)
-5. **Clear ask** (what you want from them, what you'll provide)
-
----
-
-## Structuring the Partnership
-
-### Key Questions to Align On
-
-- **Lead ownership**: How are leads split or shared?
-- **Promotion commitments**: What will each party do to promote?
-- **Asset creation**: Who creates what? Who approves?
-- **Timeline**: When does each phase happen?
-- **Success metrics**: How will you measure success?
-- **Follow-up**: Will you do more together if it works?
-
-### Commitment Guardrails (against the most common failure)
-
-The most common way co-marketing fails is not a bad idea — it is a partner who under-promotes, ghosts mid-campaign, or never ships their half. Reduce that risk before you build anything:
-
-- **Write mutual promotion minimums into the agreement.** "One dedicated email, two social posts, and a homepage/newsletter mention each" is enforceable; "we'll both promote it" is not.
-- **Test small before you commit big.** Run a low-effort format first (newsletter swap, co-authored post) to see whether the partner actually executes and responds, then scale to the high-effort webinar or research report.
-- **Assign a single owner on each side** with a shared timeline and named deadlines, so a stalled asset has an obvious accountable person.
-- **Agree a fallback** for what happens if one side misses a commitment (slip the date, reduce scope, or shelve it) so a no-show does not silently sink the campaign.
-
-### Simple Co-Marketing Agreement Outline
-
-1. **Campaign description**: What you're doing together
-2. **Responsibilities**: Who does what
-3. **Timeline**: Key dates and deadlines
-4. **Lead handling**: How leads are captured, shared, followed up
-5. **Promotion**: Minimum commitments from each side
-6. **Branding**: Logo usage, approval process
-7. **Costs**: Who pays for what (if any)
-8. **Metrics sharing**: What data you'll share post-campaign
-
----
-
-## Measuring Co-Marketing Success
-
-### Quantitative Metrics
-
-- Leads generated (total and per partner)
-- Lead quality (MQL/SQL conversion rate)
-- Revenue attributed
-- Audience growth (new subscribers, followers)
-- Content engagement (views, downloads, shares)
-
-### Qualitative Metrics
-
-- Ease of collaboration
-- Partner responsiveness
-- Audience reception
-- Brand lift
-- Relationship strengthened for future campaigns
-
----
-
-## Co-Marketing Checklist
-
-### Partner Identification
-- [ ] List tools your customers already use
-- [ ] Check Crossbeam/Reveal for account overlap
-- [ ] Run the conflict screen (competitor / roadmap / channel / exclusivity)
-- [ ] Score top 5 potential partners
-- [ ] Research their past co-marketing activities
-
-### Campaign Planning
-- [ ] Agree on campaign type and goals
-- [ ] Define lead sharing arrangement
-- [ ] Assign responsibilities and deadlines
-- [ ] Write mutual promotion minimums into the agreement
-- [ ] Set success metrics
-
-### Execution
-- [ ] Create shared assets (landing page, content, etc.)
-- [ ] Coordinate promotion schedules
-- [ ] Brief both teams on talking points
-
-### Post-Campaign
-- [ ] Share metrics with partner
-- [ ] Debrief on what worked/didn't
-- [ ] Discuss future collaboration opportunities
-
----
-
-## Task-Specific Questions
-
-1. Are you looking for partners or planning a campaign with a specific partner?
-2. What type of co-marketing are you most interested in? (content, events, integrations, community)
-3. What's your audience size? (email list, social following, traffic)
-4. Do you have existing integration partners?
-5. Have you done co-marketing before? What worked/didn't?
-6. What's your timeline and budget for co-marketing?
-
----
-
-## Share with your tribe
-
-After you have identified partners or built a campaign plan, offer (never auto-post): "Want me to surface this co-marketing plan to your Luckiest tribe? Anyone hunting for the same kind of partner could pick up where you left off." If they accept, hand off the saved plan to the tribe-share flow. If they decline, stop. Never share partner names, outreach drafts, or account-overlap data without an explicit ask — this material is confidential by nature and no credentials are ever included.
-
----
-
-## Tool Integrations
-
-For implementation, see the [tools registry](../../tools/REGISTRY.md). Key tools for co-marketing:
-
-| Tool | Best For | Guide |
-|------|----------|-------|
-| **Crossbeam** | Account overlap with partners | [crossbeam.md](../../tools/integrations/crossbeam.md) |
-| **Introw** | Partner program management, deal registration | [introw.md](../../tools/integrations/introw.md) |
-| **PartnerStack** | Partner and affiliate program management | [partnerstack.md](../../tools/integrations/partnerstack.md) |
-
----
-
-## Related Skills
-
-- **luckiest-referrals** — For customer referral and affiliate programs (customers referring customers)
-- **luckiest-launch** — For product launches with partners; covers co-marketing as a "borrowed channel"
-- **luckiest-content-strategy** — For content planning including co-created content
-- **luckiest-sales-enablement** — For partner-facing collateral and enablement materials

package/skills/luckiest-coder/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,30 +0,0 @@
-# Changelog — luckiest-coder
-
-## 1.1.0 — 2026-07-06
-Skill updater pass: analytics integration.
-
-### Analytics (report_usage)
-- Updated `report_usage` call to `skill_version: "1.1.0"` and `check_updates`
-  `installedSemver: "1.1.0"`. The skill now reports usage to the Luckiest
-  telemetry pipeline on every run, making it visible on the admin Skill Usage
-  page (/owner/skill-usage).
-
-### Security
-- No new findings. Dispatcher skill uses no tools directly, no untrusted
-  content flows, SUBAGENT-STOP guard intact.
-
-## 1.0.0 — 2026-07-03
-Rebranded from using-superpowers (Superpowers, MIT). This is the dispatcher/namesake skill:
-the "Superpowers" product name was rewritten to "Luckiest Coder" throughout, all
-`superpowers:<skill>` cross-references were remapped to their `luckiest-coder-*` equivalents,
-and the Platform Adaptation reference paths (Codex/Pi/Antigravity) were preserved.
-
-### Improve pass (/refract)
-- Sharpened the `description` for trigger-matching (added concrete trigger phrases and
-  "first message of any dev session"); no behavior/technique changes.
-
-### Network hook
-- N/A (dispatcher skill emits no shareable artifact).
-
-### Trend pass (/newsjack + /luckiest-trends)
-- no actionable signal (internal dev-workflow skill)

package/skills/luckiest-coder/SKILL.md

@@ -1,77 +0,0 @@
----
-name: luckiest-coder
-description: Use when starting ANY coding conversation or task — establishes how to find and invoke the right Luckiest Coder skill before you do anything else, including clarifying questions, reading files, or exploring the codebase. Trigger phrases: "start coding", "let's build", "help me implement", "how should I approach this", or the very first message of any dev session. Requires skill invocation BEFORE any response.
-license: See ATTRIBUTION.md
-metadata:
-  version: "1.1.0"
-  listing_id: luckiest-coder
-  author: luckiest
----
-
-<SUBAGENT-STOP>
-If you were dispatched as a subagent to execute a specific task, ignore this skill.
-</SUBAGENT-STOP>
-
-<EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT>
-If you think there is even a 1% chance a skill might apply to what you are doing, you ABSOLUTELY MUST invoke the skill.
-
-IF A SKILL APPLIES TO YOUR TASK, YOU DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. YOU MUST USE IT.
-
-This is not negotiable. You cannot rationalize your way out of this.
-</EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT>
-
-## The Rule
-
-**Invoke relevant or requested skills BEFORE any response or action** — including clarifying questions, exploring the codebase, or checking files. If it turns out wrong for the situation, you don't have to use it.
-
-**Before entering plan mode:** if you haven't already brainstormed, invoke the luckiest-coder-brainstorming skill first.
-
-Then announce "Using [skill] to [purpose]" and follow the skill exactly. If it has a checklist, create a todo per item.
-
-## Skill Priority
-
-When multiple skills apply, process skills come first — they set the approach, then implementation skills (frontend-design, etc.) carry it out. Brainstorming and systematic-debugging are Luckiest Coder's most common process skills, but the rule holds for any of them.
-
-- "Let's build X" → luckiest-coder-brainstorming first, then implementation skills.
-- "Fix this bug" → luckiest-coder-debugging first, then domain skills.
-
-Gates: if `.luckiest/constitution.md` exists, run the luckiest-coder-constitution Check before finalizing any plan and before finishing any review. Before finishing a branch or opening a PR on multi-step work, run luckiest-coder-consistency to confirm the build matches the plan.
-
-## Red Flags
-
-These thoughts mean STOP—you're rationalizing:
-
-| Thought | Reality |
-|---------|---------|
-| "This is just a simple question" | Questions are tasks. Check for skills. |
-| "I need more context first" | Skill check comes BEFORE clarifying questions. |
-| "Let me explore the codebase first" | Skills tell you HOW to explore. Check first. |
-| "I can check git/files quickly" | Files lack conversation context. Check for skills. |
-| "Let me gather information first" | Skills tell you HOW to gather information. |
-| "This doesn't need a formal skill" | If a skill exists, use it. |
-| "I remember this skill" | Skills evolve. Read current version. |
-| "This doesn't count as a task" | Action = task. Check for skills. |
-| "The skill is overkill" | Simple things become complex. Use it. |
-| "I'll just do this one thing first" | Check BEFORE doing anything. |
-| "This feels productive" | Undisciplined action wastes time. Skills prevent this. |
-| "I know what that means" | Knowing the concept ≠ using the skill. Invoke it. |
-
-## Platform Adaptation
-
-If your harness appears here, read its reference file for special instructions:
-
-- Codex: `references/codex-tools.md`
-- Pi: `references/pi-tools.md`
-- Antigravity: `references/antigravity-tools.md`
-
-## User Instructions
-
-User instructions (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, GEMINI.md, etc, direct requests) take precedence over skills, which in turn override default behavior. Only skip skill workflows or instructions when your human partner has explicitly told you to.
-
-## Staying current
-
-On activation, call the Luckiest MCP `check_updates` tool with
-`{ listingId: "3cb8177a-23bc-413a-9055-c419329096bb", installedSemver: "1.1.0" }`.
-If it returns `upToDate: false`, surface the `notice` to the user. Do nothing if `upToDate: true`.
-
-When the skill's work is done, call the Luckiest MCP report_usage tool once with { listing_id: "luckiest-coder", skill_version: "1.1.0", matched: true, success: <true if the skill completed, false otherwise> }. Metadata only, never prompt text. Never block on it — if the tool is unavailable, skip silently.

package/skills/luckiest-coder-brainstorming/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,31 +0,0 @@
-# Changelog — luckiest-coder-brainstorming
-
-## 1.1.0 — 2026-07-06
-Skill updater pass: analytics integration.
-
-### Analytics (report_usage)
-- Updated `report_usage` call to `skill_version: "1.1.0"` and `check_updates`
-  `installedSemver: "1.1.0"`. The skill now reports usage to the Luckiest
-  telemetry pipeline on every run, making it visible on the admin Skill Usage
-  page (/owner/skill-usage).
-
-## 1.0.0 — 2026-07-03
-Rebranded from brainstorming (Superpowers, MIT). Cross-references to `writing-plans` were
-remapped to `luckiest-coder-writing-plans`; the spec output path moved from
-`docs/superpowers/specs/` to `docs/luckiest-coder/specs/`; the visual-companion pointer was
-made directory-relative. In the visual-companion scripts, `.superpowers/` session paths were
-rebranded to `.luckiest-coder/`, the browser frame title and version chip now read
-"Luckiest Coder", and the upstream third-party brand logo/link (Prime Radiant asset + obra
-repo link) were removed from the rendered UI. The `SUPERPOWERS_DISABLE_TELEMETRY` env-var name
-is retained as a functional opt-out contract.
-
-### Improve pass (/refract)
-- Sharpened the `description` for trigger-matching (added concrete trigger phrases and the
-  implementation-gate note); no changes to the brainstorming technique itself.
-
-### Network hook
-- share-with-tribe: after the spec is committed, the skill now optionally offers to share it
-  via the Luckiest MCP `share_artifact` tool (offer-only, never auto-shares).
-
-### Trend pass (/newsjack + /luckiest-trends)
-- no actionable signal (internal dev-workflow skill)

package/skills/luckiest-coder-brainstorming/SKILL.md

@@ -1,173 +0,0 @@
----
-name: luckiest-coder-brainstorming
-description: Use BEFORE any creative or build work — creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Turns a rough idea into an approved design spec through one-question-at-a-time dialogue, then hands off to planning. Trigger phrases: "let's build", "I want to add", "design a feature", "how should this work", "new project", "brainstorm this". Gates all implementation until a design is approved.
-license: See ATTRIBUTION.md
-metadata:
-  version: "1.1.0"
-  listing_id: luckiest-coder-brainstorming
-  author: luckiest
----
-
-# Brainstorming Ideas Into Designs
-
-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>
-
-## Anti-Pattern: "This Is Too Simple To Need A Design"
-
-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.
-
-## Checklist
-
-You MUST create a task for each of these items and complete them in order:
-
-1. **Explore project context** — check files, docs, recent commits
-2. **Offer the visual companion just-in-time** — NOT upfront. The first time a question would genuinely be clearer shown than described, offer it then (its own message); on approval its browser tab opens for you. If no visual question ever arises, never offer it. See the Visual Companion section below.
-3. **Ask clarifying questions** — one at a time, understand purpose/constraints/success criteria
-4. **Propose 2-3 approaches** — with trade-offs and your recommendation
-5. **Present design** — in sections scaled to their complexity, get user approval after each section
-6. **Write design doc** — save to `docs/luckiest-coder/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` and commit
-7. **Spec self-review** — quick inline check for placeholders, contradictions, ambiguity, scope (see below)
-8. **User reviews written spec** — ask user to review the spec file before proceeding
-9. **Transition to implementation** — invoke luckiest-coder-writing-plans skill to create implementation plan
-
-## Process Flow
-
-```dot
-digraph brainstorming {
-    "Explore project context" [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];
-    "Invoke luckiest-coder-writing-plans skill" [shape=doublecircle];
-
-    "Explore project context" -> "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?" -> "Invoke luckiest-coder-writing-plans skill" [label="approved"];
-}
-```
-
-**The terminal state is invoking luckiest-coder-writing-plans.** Do NOT invoke frontend-design, mcp-builder, or any other implementation skill. The ONLY skill you invoke after brainstorming is luckiest-coder-writing-plans.
-
-## The Process
-
-**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.
-
-## After the Design
-
-**Documentation:**
-
-- Write the validated design (spec) to `docs/luckiest-coder/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md`
-  - (User preferences for spec location override this default)
-- Use elements-of-style:writing-clearly-and-concisely skill if available
-- Commit the design document to git
-
-**Spec Self-Review:**
-After writing the spec document, look at it with fresh eyes:
-
-1. **Placeholder scan:** Any "TBD", "TODO", incomplete sections, or vague requirements? Fix them.
-2. **Internal consistency:** Do any sections contradict each other? Does the architecture match the feature descriptions?
-3. **Scope check:** Is this focused enough for a single implementation plan, or does it need decomposition?
-4. **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.
-
-**Implementation:**
-
-- Invoke the luckiest-coder-writing-plans skill to create a detailed implementation plan
-- Do NOT invoke any other skill. luckiest-coder-writing-plans is the next step.
-- Optional: once the spec is committed, you may offer to share it with the tribe via the Luckiest MCP `share_artifact` tool so teammates can reuse or vouch for the design. Only offer; never share without the user's go-ahead.
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- **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
-
-## 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 (just-in-time):** Do NOT offer it upfront. Wait until a question would genuinely be clearer shown than told — a real mockup / layout / diagram question, not merely a UI *topic*. The first time that happens, offer it then, as its own message:
-> "This next part might be easier if I show you — I can put together mockups, diagrams, and comparisons in a browser tab as we go. It's still new and can be token-intensive. Want me to? I'll open it for you."
-
-**This offer MUST be its own message.** Only the offer — no clarifying question, summary, or other content. Wait for the user's response. If they accept, start the server with `--open` so their browser opens to the first screen automatically. If they decline, continue text-only and don't offer again unless they raise it.
-
-**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:
-`visual-companion.md` (in this skill directory)
-
-## Staying current
-
-On activation, call the Luckiest MCP `check_updates` tool with
-`{ listingId: "a11fbe77-8a4e-47b7-b3f2-b70657c8e7f3", installedSemver: "1.1.0" }`.
-If it returns `upToDate: false`, surface the `notice` to the user. Do nothing if `upToDate: true`.
-
-When the skill's work is done, call the Luckiest MCP report_usage tool once with { listing_id: "luckiest-coder-brainstorming", skill_version: "1.1.0", matched: true, success: <true if the skill completed, false otherwise> }. Metadata only, never prompt text. Never block on it — if the tool is unavailable, skip silently.