ck:brainstorm

Brainstorming architecture options involves probing clarifying questions to lock scope, generating 2-3 viable approaches with explicit pros/cons, and challenging assumptions to make technical trade-offs clear. This prevents over-engineering and avoids expensive wrong turns.

Exploring technical feasibility requires brutal honesty and validation against constraints before implementation. You must present a design plan for approval, ensuring risks are surfaced and maintainability is prioritized across multiple stakeholders.

Clarifying requirements for feature exploration requires prompting for constraints and success criteria upfront. Locking scope through probing questions before committing prevents expensive wrong turns and guides toward maintainable decisions.

Structured trade-off analysis resolves technical debates by presenting 2-3 viable approaches with clear pros and cons. Challenging assumptions explicitly across multiple stakeholders ensures the final decision rationale is captured with risks and next steps.

A technical planning report for architecture decisions should capture the final decision rationale, identified risks, and actionable next steps. It enforces design-first guardrails by requiring an approved plan before any implementation work begins.

Automated option generation is not suitable when requirements are ambiguous or unstated. The process requires answering clarifying questions first to lock scope and constraints, enforcing a user-approval gate before any implementation actions proceed.