连续波头脑风暴

SKILL研究检索

原名 cw-brainstorming

研究检索 只读 许可证不明确 CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI
安装这个技能

cw-brainstorming 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

累计安装 3,770 本周 154
GitHub 星标 147 仓库 creative-writing-skills
下载量 1,220 技能市场下载数
权限级别 只读 安装前请确认风险范围
许可证 许可证不明确 unknown

安装

GitHub 仓库
在支持 Skills 的客户端里执行,装完问一句「你有哪些技能」验证
npx skills add https://github.com/haowjy/creative-writing-skills --skill cw-brainstorming

技能档案

研究检索
字段来自技能仓库与公开索引,中文说明由本站标注
作者 / 维护方haowjy仓库 creative-writing-skills · 版本 未标注
宿主客户端Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI技能可被这些客户端加载
安装方式GitHub 仓库安装包 haowjy/creative-writing-skills
权限级别只读安装前请确认风险范围
许可证unknown许可证不明确,商用前请自行确认条款
仓库可用性available技能仓库当前是否可访问
最近核验2026-05-01上游最后核验时间 · 数据更新 未标注
正文体量7.1 KBSKILL.md 原文大小,越大说明说明书写得越细

能做什么

4 项能力
上游给出的能力概览与适用场景
  • 按任务关键词查找相关 Skills
  • 展示可复制的安装命令
  • 保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验
  • 展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果
用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

权限与风险

只读
装之前先读完这段

安装与使用指南

安装步骤

本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

怎么用

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;当前草稿只做目录说明,具体调用方式由规则抽取,异常条目再复核。

SKILL.md 全文

7.1 KB
模型实际读到的说明书原文,来自技能仓库

Brainstorming Capture

Capture story brainstorming in working note format that preserves creative freedom.

Core Principle

Record brainstorming WITHOUT:

  • Over-elaborating on what was stated
  • Mixing user statements with AI suggestions unmarked
  • Inventing excessive details
  • Constraining future creativity

AI suggestions are valuable but must be clearly marked and kept minimal.

Types of Brainstorming

This skill handles all brainstorming types:

  • Story/plot directions (general narrative exploration)
  • Chapter structure and beats (planning individual chapters)
  • Worldbuilding and lore (magic systems, cultures, history, geography)
  • Character development (motivations, arcs, relationships)
  • Timeline and continuity (chronology, contradictions)

All share core principles (minimal capture, source tagging, preserve vagueness). See references/ for specialized guidance:

  • chapter-planning.md - Capturing beat and scene exploration
  • worldbuilding.md - Exploring fictional world elements (use web search for research)
  • character-development.md - Exploring motivations, arcs, relationships
  • continuity-timeline.md - Timeline tracking and contradiction handling

Critical Rules

1. Minimal Capture Only

Record ONLY what the user explicitly states. Do NOT add elaborations, examples they didn't give, or details to fill gaps.

The problem is mixing, not suggesting:

❌ User: "Character A competes with B" → Capture: "A and B compete for leadership through a tournament with three rounds..." ✅ User: "Character A competes with B" → Capture: "A and B compete" + optional: "Tournament? Political? Trial?"

2. Source Tagging (Simple 3-Tag System)

Default: Untagged = user said it. Most ideas come from the user, so treat them as the default.

ONLY use tags for special context:

  1. <AI>...</AI> - AI suggestions/possibilities (MUST be clearly wrapped)
    - Use when offering ideas user didn't state
    - Keep to 2-3 brief options
    - Example: <AI>Competition could be: tournament-style, political maneuvering, or trial-based</AI>
  2. <hidden>...</hidden> - Author-only information meant to be revealed later
    - Secret character motivations
    - Planned twists/revelations
    - Behind-the-scenes reasons unknown to characters/readers yet
    - Example: <hidden>Z secretly wants them both to fail so he can reclaim leadership</hidden>

When to offer AI suggestions:

  • User asks for ideas
  • User seems stuck
  • Offering brief possibilities to spark creativity

When to stay minimal:

  • User is actively exploring their own ideas
  • Just capturing an ongoing discussion
  • User didn't ask for suggestions

3. Preserve Vagueness

Keep it vague if user leaves it vague:

  • "might create tension" → Record as uncertain
  • "thinking about" → Record as consideration
  • "maybe" → Record as possibility

4. Multiple Options Coexist

Working notes can contain contradictions and multiple possibilities. Don't resolve them - just list the options being considered.

Output Approach

Use whatever structure fits the discussion. Could be:

  • Bullet lists
  • Sections organized by topic
  • Timeline format
  • Character-focused groupings
  • Whatever captures the brainstorm clearly

Essential elements:

  • Minimal capture (user's words, not elaborations)
  • Vagueness preserved
  • AI suggestions wrapped in <AI> tags
  • Author-only info wrapped in <hidden> tags when relevant

Optional sections based on discussion:

  • Open questions to explore
  • Multiple options being considered
  • AI suggestions (if offered)
  • Contradictions to resolve later

Teaching Example: The Distinction

User Says:

"I'm thinking character X and character Y compete for leadership. Maybe this creates tension with character Z who was the previous leader."

✅ Good Capture:

# Leadership Competition Notes

- X and Y compete for leadership
- Z was previous leader
- May create tension with Z (uncertain)

Open questions:
- Form of competition?
- How does Z respond?
- Outcome?

❌ Bad Capture:

# Leadership Competition Arc

X and Y compete for leadership after Z steps down. Z feels threatened by the challenge to his authority.

The competition unfolds in three stages:
1. Announcement and initial positioning
2. First challenge where X demonstrates strength
3. Second challenge where Y shows wisdom
...
[20 more invented beats]

Why bad? Added massive elaboration the user never stated.

✅ Good with AI Suggestions:

# Leadership Competition Notes

- X and Y compete for leadership
- Z was previous leader
- May create tension with Z (uncertain)

Open questions:
- Competition format: <AI>tournament-style? political maneuvering? trial-based?</AI>
- Z's response: <AI>oppose both? support one? stay neutral?</AI>
- Resolution?

✅ Good with Hidden Author Notes:

# Leadership Competition Notes

- X and Y compete for leadership
- Z was previous leader
- May create tension with Z (uncertain)
- <hidden>Z is secretly manipulating both X and Y to destroy each other, planning to reclaim power after they're both discredited</hidden>

Open questions:
- Competition format?
- Outcome?

Why use <hidden>? The manipulation twist is planned for later reveal. Readers/characters don't know yet, but the author needs to track it while brainstorming.

If You're Over-Elaborating

Stop if you're writing:

  • Numbered scene lists
  • Detailed backstories
  • Specific dialogue
  • Precise timelines
  • Multiple paragraphs per point
  • Examples user didn't mention

Wrap AI suggestions in <AI> tags, keep minimal (2-3 options).

Success Check

Good: User says "Yes, that's what I said" Bad: User says "I never said all that"

Notes should feel skeletal and incomplete. That's the point - preserves creative freedom.

After Capturing: Discuss and Explore

DON'T just write notes and stop. After capturing, engage with the user to help develop ideas:

Useful follow-ups:

  • Clarifying questions: "You mentioned tension with Z - are you thinking internal conflict or external confrontation?"
  • Potential directions: "This setup could go a few ways: political intrigue, personal drama, or action-focused. What feels right?"
  • Exploring implications: "If Z opposes them both, how does that change the power dynamics?"
  • Connecting threads: "This competition ties into the earlier succession crisis you mentioned - want to explore that link?"

Keep it conversational:

  • Offer 2-3 possibilities, not exhaustive lists
  • Ask about what excites the user
  • Help clarify vague ideas without over-defining them
  • Point out interesting implications or contradictions

The goal: Help the user think through their ideas, not take over the creative process.

Skills are Composable

Feel free to combine with other skills when helpful (e.g., using cw-official-docs to document finalized worldbuilding, or cw-story-critique to analyze what you're brainstorming).

File Placement (Claude Code)

  1. Check project docs for conventions
  2. Look at where similar content lives
  3. Place near related content
  4. Name: brainstorm-[topic].md
  5. Ask if unclear

安全信息

审计结论
未标注不代表已通过审计
安全审计Gen Agent Trust Hub、Socket、Snyk第三方安全审计平台给出的结论

热门专题

按场景挑技能
全部专题 →

技能内容以作者仓库为准;分类、权限级别与许可证状态的中文说明为中文整理,最近核验 2026-05-01。