specweave 1.0.392 → 1.0.393

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "specweave",
-  "version": "1.0.392",
+  "version": "1.0.393",
   "description": "Spec-driven development framework for AI coding agents. Works with Claude Code, Codex, Antigravity, Cursor, Copilot & more. 100+ skills, 49 CLI commands, verified skill certification, autonomous execution, and living documentation.",
   "type": "module",
   "main": "dist/index.js",

package/plugins/specweave/skills/brainstorm/SKILL.md

@@ -13,13 +13,9 @@ model: opus
 
 ## Persona
 
-You are an expert ideation facilitator who explores problems from multiple angles before converging on a recommendation. You combine structured thinking frameworks (Six Thinking Hats, SCAMPER, TRIZ) with pragmatic engineering judgment. Your goal is NOT to generate specs or code — it is to **expand the solution space** so the user makes a well-informed decision before committing to an implementation path.
+Expert ideation facilitator. Combines structured frameworks (Six Thinking Hats, SCAMPER, TRIZ) with engineering judgment. Goal: **expand the solution space** before committing to an implementation path.
 
-**Core principles:**
-- Diverge before converging — resist the urge to jump to the "obvious" solution
-- Every approach gets a fair hearing — even unconventional ones
-- Compact output — tables over essays, bullets over paragraphs
-- The brainstorm feeds into `/sw:increment`, never replaces it
+**Principles:** Diverge before converging | Every approach gets fair hearing | Tables over essays | Feeds into `/sw:increment`, never replaces it
 
 ---
 
@@ -131,41 +127,15 @@ If no topic is provided, ask the user: "What would you like to brainstorm about?
 
 ### Resume Mode (`--resume`)
 
-When `--resume` is passed:
-
-1. **Find the most recent state file** matching the topic:
-   ```bash
-   ls -t .specweave/state/brainstorm-*-${TOPIC_SLUG}*.json 2>/dev/null | head -1
-   ```
-2. **Read the state file** to determine where the session left off
-3. **Read the brainstorm document** (if one was partially saved)
-4. **Resume from the last completed phase**:
-   - If `phase: "frame"` → resume at Phase 2 (Diverge)
-   - If `phase: "evaluate"` → show the existing matrix, ask if user wants to re-evaluate or proceed
-   - If `phase: "complete"` → show the saved document, offer to explore abandoned branches from the idea tree
-5. **Present abandoned branches**: If the idea tree has approaches marked as abandoned or unexplored, offer to dig into those with a different lens
-
-This enables iterative brainstorming — start with quick mode, then `--resume --depth deep` to go deeper on the same topic.
+When `--resume`: find most recent state file (`ls -t .specweave/state/brainstorm-*-${TOPIC_SLUG}*.json | head -1`), read it, resume from last completed phase. If `phase: "complete"`, offer to explore abandoned branches with a different lens. Enables iterative brainstorming: quick first, then `--resume --depth deep`.
 
 ### Custom Evaluation Criteria (`--criteria`)
 
-Override the default evaluation criteria with domain-specific ones:
-
-```bash
-/sw:brainstorm "marketing strategy" --criteria "brand-fit,audience-reach,cost,differentiation"
-/sw:brainstorm "database choice" --criteria "read-perf,write-perf,operational-complexity,cost,ecosystem"
-```
-
-**Preset criteria sets** (auto-detected from context when `--criteria` is not provided):
-
-| Context | Criteria |
-|---------|----------|
-| **Engineering** (default) | Complexity, Time, Risk, Extensibility, Alignment |
-| **Marketing/Product** | Brand Fit, Audience Reach, Cost, Differentiation, Time-to-Market |
-| **Infrastructure** | Performance, Reliability, Cost, Operational Complexity, Scalability |
-| **Business** | Revenue Impact, Cost, Time-to-Value, Strategic Alignment, Risk |
-
-When custom criteria are provided, use them instead of the defaults in the Phase 3 Evaluation Matrix. Each criterion is still scored on a 1-5 scale.
+Override defaults: `/sw:brainstorm "topic" --criteria "perf,cost,complexity,risk"`. Preset sets auto-detected:
+- **Engineering** (default): Complexity, Time, Risk, Extensibility, Alignment
+- **Marketing/Product**: Brand Fit, Audience Reach, Cost, Differentiation, Time-to-Market
+- **Infrastructure**: Performance, Reliability, Cost, Operational Complexity, Scalability
+- **Business**: Revenue Impact, Cost, Time-to-Value, Strategic Alignment, Risk
 
 ---
 
@@ -475,195 +445,63 @@ Generate 4-6 independent approaches, each with a different strategic orientation
 
 ### Lens: TRIZ / Inventive Principles + Constraint Inversion
 
-Two-part structured analysis combining TRIZ inventive principles with assumption negation.
-
-**Part 1: Apply TRIZ Inventive Principles** (select 5-7 most relevant from the 40):
-
-| # | Principle | Software Adaptation |
-|---|-----------|-------------------|
-| 1 | Segmentation | Break monolith into microservices; split large features into independent modules |
-| 2 | Taking Out / Extraction | Extract cross-cutting concerns (auth, logging) into middleware or services |
-| 5 | Merging | Combine multiple API calls into batch endpoints; merge related microservices |
-| 10 | Preliminary Action | Pre-compute, cache, warm up; generate at build time instead of runtime |
-| 13 | The Other Way Round | Invert control flow (push vs pull, server-driven vs client-driven, event sourcing) |
-| 15 | Dynamicity | Feature flags, A/B testing, config-driven behavior instead of hardcoded |
-| 17 | Another Dimension | Add time dimension (versioning, audit trails); add abstraction layer |
-| 22 | Blessing in Disguise | Turn a constraint into a feature (rate limiting → fair usage; downtime → maintenance window) |
-| 24 | Intermediary | Add proxy, gateway, adapter, or anti-corruption layer |
-| 25 | Self-Service | User-facing admin panels, self-serve onboarding, API key management |
-| 28 | Mechanics Substitution | Replace manual process with automation; replace polling with webhooks |
-| 35 | Parameter Change | Change data format (JSON→protobuf), protocol (REST→gRPC), storage engine |
-| 40 | Composite Materials | Polyglot persistence, hybrid architectures, best-of-breed tool selection |
-
-For each relevant principle, generate ONE approach that applies it to the problem.
-
-**Part 2: Constraint Inversion** (the original approach, now enhanced):
+Two-part analysis combining TRIZ inventive principles with assumption negation.
 
-1. **List 3-5 core assumptions** about the problem
-2. **For each assumption**, generate an approach where that assumption is **negated**
-3. **Evaluate** which inversions produce viable alternatives
-4. **Cross-reference** with Part 1 — do any TRIZ principles align with the inversions?
-5. **Output**: The 3-4 most promising combined approaches
+**Part 1: TRIZ Inventive Principles** — Select 5-7 most relevant from the 40 (e.g., #1 Segmentation, #2 Extraction, #5 Merging, #10 Preliminary Action, #13 Inversion, #15 Dynamicity, #17 Another Dimension, #24 Intermediary, #28 Automation, #35 Parameter Change). For each, generate ONE approach applying it to the problem.
 
-Example:
-- Assumption: "Users must authenticate before accessing data"
-- TRIZ #13 (The Other Way Round): Invert the flow — data is public by default with audit trails
-- TRIZ #25 (Self-Service): Users manage their own access permissions
-- Inversion viable? → Assess trade-offs — this is literally how Google Docs sharing works
+**Part 2: Constraint Inversion** — List 3-5 core assumptions → negate each → evaluate which inversions produce viable alternatives → cross-reference with Part 1 → output 3-4 most promising combined approaches.
 
-**Deep mode dispatch**: Can dispatch Part 1 (principles) and Part 2 (inversions) as 2 parallel `Agent()` calls, then synthesize.
+**Deep mode dispatch**: Part 1 (principles) and Part 2 (inversions) as 2 parallel `Agent()` calls, then synthesize.
 
 ### Lens: Adjacent Possible
 
 What recently became feasible? Web-search-enhanced analysis:
 
-1. **Research phase** — Use `WebSearch` to ground ideas in reality:
-   ```
-   WebSearch({ query: "[topic] new tools frameworks 2025 2026" })
-   WebSearch({ query: "[topic] emerging approaches trends" })
-   ```
-   Extract: new APIs, frameworks, cost changes, AI capabilities, regulatory shifts.
-
-2. **Scan recent developments**: Combine web search results with model knowledge about:
-   - New APIs and services launched in the last 12 months
-   - AI capabilities that crossed a quality/cost threshold
-   - Infrastructure cost drops (storage, compute, bandwidth)
-   - Regulatory changes that enable/restrict approaches
-   - Open-source projects that matured to production-ready
-
-3. **Generate 4-6 approaches** that leverage these newly-possible capabilities
-
-4. **Focus**: "What was impossible or impractical 12 months ago but is now viable?"
-
-5. **Ground each approach** — cite the specific development that enables it:
-   ```
-   ### Approach: LLM-Powered Classification
-   **Enabled by**: Claude 4/GPT-4o quality + sub-$1/1M token pricing (2025)
-   **Previously**: Required custom ML models, labeled datasets, training infra
-   **Now**: Zero-shot classification via API call, 95%+ accuracy for most use cases
-   ```
-
-Example prompts:
-- "What if we used LLMs for [X] instead of building rules?"
-- "What if we used edge computing for [Y] instead of centralized?"
-- "What if the cost of [Z] dropped 10x — how would our approach change?"
-- "What open-source tool launched recently that solves [Y] out of the box?"
+1. **Research** — Use `WebSearch` to find new tools, frameworks, cost changes, AI capabilities, regulatory shifts for the topic
+2. **Scan** recent developments: new APIs (12 months), AI cost/quality thresholds, infra cost drops, mature OSS projects
+3. **Generate 4-6 approaches** leveraging newly-possible capabilities
+4. **Ground each** — cite the enabling development: `**Enabled by**: [what changed] | **Previously**: [old approach] | **Now**: [new approach]`
+
+Focus: "What was impossible or impractical 12 months ago but is now viable?"
 
 ---
 
 ## Output Template
 
+Save to `.specweave/docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-{topic-slug}.md`. Structure:
+
 ```markdown
 # Brainstorm: [Topic]
-
-**Date**: YYYY-MM-DD
-**Depth**: quick | standard | deep
-**Lens(es)**: [lens names used]
-**Status**: complete
-**Handed off to**: [increment ID or "none"]
-
----
+**Date**: YYYY-MM-DD | **Depth**: [mode] | **Lens(es)**: [names] | **Status**: complete
 
 ## Problem Frame
-
-**Statement**: [One clear sentence]
-
-### Starbursting
-- **Who**: [answer]
-- **What**: [answer]
-- **When**: [answer]
-- **Where**: [answer]
-- **Why**: [answer]
-- **How**: [high-level]
-
-### Clarifications
-1. Q: [question] — A: [answer]
-
----
+**Statement**: [sentence] | **Who/What/When/Where/Why/How**: [answers] | **Clarifications**: [Q&A]
 
 ## Approaches
-
 ### Approach A: [Name]
-**Source**: [lens/facet]
-**Summary**: [2-3 sentences]
-**Key Steps**:
-1. [step]
-2. [step]
-3. [step]
-**Strengths**: [bullets]
-**Risks**: [bullets]
-**Effort**: [Low/Medium/High]
-
-[... more approaches ...]
-
----
+**Source**: [lens/facet] | **Summary**: [2-3 sentences] | **Key Steps**: [numbered]
+**Strengths**: [bullets] | **Risks**: [bullets] | **Effort**: [Low/Medium/High]
 
 ## Evaluation Matrix
-
-| Criterion     | A   | B   | C   |
-|---------------|:---:|:---:|:---:|
-| Complexity    | 2/5 | 3/5 | 4/5 |
-| Time          | 3/5 | 2/5 | 1/5 |
-| Risk          | 4/5 | 3/5 | 4/5 |
-| Extensibility | 2/5 | 4/5 | 5/5 |
-| Alignment     | 5/5 | 3/5 | 2/5 |
-| **Total**     |**16**|**15**|**16**|
-
----
+| Criterion | A | B | C |
+|-----------|:-:|:-:|:-:|
+| Complexity/Time/Risk/Extensibility/Alignment | x/5 | x/5 | x/5 |
+| **Total** | **X** | **X** | **X** |
 
 ## Recommendation
-
-**Selected**: Approach [X] — [Name]
-**Rationale**: [2-3 sentences]
-**Caveats**: [what to watch for]
-
----
+**Selected**: Approach [X] | **Rationale**: [sentences] | **Caveats**: [notes]
 
 ## Deep Analysis
-
-### Abstraction Ladder
-- **Goal above**: [broader goal]
-- **Our problem**: [as stated]
-- **First steps**: [concrete actions]
-
-### Analogies
-1. [Domain]: [how they solved similar problem]
-2. [Domain]: [how they solved similar problem]
-
-### Hidden Assumptions
-1. [Assumption] — if inverted: [consequence]
-2. [Assumption] — if inverted: [consequence]
-
-### Pre-Mortem
-| Failure Mode | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
-|---|:---:|:---:|---|
-| [failure] | Med | High | [action] |
-
----
+(deep mode only) Abstraction Ladder | Analogies | Hidden Assumptions | Pre-Mortem table
 
 ## Idea Tree
-
-[topic]
-├── Approach A: [name] ([status])
-│   └── Variant A1: [brief]
-├── Approach B: [name] (SELECTED)
-│   ├── Variant B1: [brief]
-│   └── Variant B2: [brief]
-└── Approach C: [name] ([status])
-
----
+[topic] tree with approaches, variants, and status markers (SELECTED/abandoned)
 
 ## Next Steps
-
-- [ ] `/sw:increment "[selected approach]"` — Turn into implementation plan
-- [ ] `/sw:brainstorm "[topic]" --depth deep --lens [other]` — Explore further
-- [ ] Park and revisit later
+- `/sw:increment` | Brainstorm deeper | Park for later
 ```
 
-**Notes on the template:**
-- Omit "Deep Analysis" section for quick/standard depth
-- Omit "Idea Tree" variants for quick mode
-- The template is a guide — adapt sections to fit the actual brainstorm content
+**Notes:** Omit Deep Analysis for quick/standard. Omit Idea Tree variants for quick.
 
 ---