commit pi sessions
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
description: Generate 3–5 design alternatives with trade-offs before committing to an approach
|
||||
argument-hint: "[problem or feature to design]"
|
||||
subagent: true
|
||||
fork: true
|
||||
---
|
||||
Brainstorm approaches for: $@
|
||||
|
||||
Structure your answer as:
|
||||
1. **Problem restatement** — one paragraph; what we're solving, what constraints matter, what "done" looks like
|
||||
2. **Alternatives** — 3 to 5 distinct approaches. For each:
|
||||
- **Summary** — one or two sentences
|
||||
- **How it works** — the key mechanism
|
||||
- **Pros** — what it gets right
|
||||
- **Cons** — what it costs, risks, or breaks
|
||||
- **Best when** — the conditions that would make this the right pick
|
||||
3. **Comparison table** — across the alternatives, score or rank on: complexity, time-to-ship, reversibility, performance, fit-with-existing-code
|
||||
4. **Recommendation** — which one to pick *given the current codebase*, with the second choice as a fallback
|
||||
5. **Unknowns** — questions that, if answered, would change the recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
Be opinionated. Surface real trade-offs, not strawmen. If the obvious approach wins decisively, say so and only enumerate 2 alternatives — don't manufacture options for the sake of a full set. If the problem is under-specified, ask clarifying questions before brainstorming.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user