hermes-skills/software-development/ideate/SKILL.md

name, description, version, author, license, metadata

name	description	version	author	license	metadata
ideate	Generate, develop, and evaluate ideas for features, products, or solutions. Use when the user wants to explore possibilities, generate options, or find creative directions — not when they already have a specific plan.	1.0.0	Hermes Agent (merged from Every Inc compound-engineering ce-ideate)	MIT	hermes tags related_skills ideation creativity exploration brainstorming compound-engineering brainstorming tech-pov plan compound-learning

Ideate

Generate, develop, and evaluate ideas. Move from "we need ideas" to a ranked shortlist with rationale — grounded in project context, not generic brainstorming.

Core principle: Ideas are cheap; evaluated ideas grounded in real context are valuable. The output is not a list of ideas — it's a ranked, contextualized shortlist with a clear recommendation.

When to Use

• "What should we build next?"
• "Give me ideas for improving X"
• "How could we approach Y?"
• "What features would make sense for Z?"
• Open-ended exploration before committing to a specific plan

Not for: bounded technology decisions (use tech-pov), dialog-driven design refinement (use brainstorming), or implementation planning (use plan).

The Process

Phase 1: Frame the Question

Clarify what kind of ideas are needed:

1. Domain — what area? (product features, DX improvements, perf, UX, architecture)
2. Constraints — budget, timeline, team size, tech stack, must-not-break constraints
3. Appetite — incremental improvements vs bold bets vs moonshots
4. Success criterion — how will we know a good idea when we see it?

If the user's framing is vague, ask ONE clarifying question. Don't over-interview.

Phase 2: Ground in Context

Before generating ideas, understand the landscape:

# What does the project already have?
search_files("*", target="files", path="src/")

# Any prior decisions or learnings?
search_files("keyword", path="docs/solutions/")

# Recent git activity — what's being worked on?
terminal("git log --oneline -20")

# Existing strategy or roadmap?
read_file("STRATEGY.md")  # if exists
read_file("ROADMAP.md")   # if exists

For broader context, dispatch a research scout:

delegate_task(
    goal="Research the current state of [domain]: what competitors do, what users expect, what's emerging. Return 5-10 key insights relevant to ideation.",
    context="Ideating for [project]. Domain: [area].",
    toolsets=["web"]
)

Phase 3: Generate Ideas

Use multiple generation strategies — different strategies find different ideas:

Strategy 1: First Principles

Start from the core problem. What would the ideal solution look like with no constraints? Then add constraints back.

Strategy 2: Analogy

What solves similar problems in other domains? (other products, nature, games, manufacturing)

Strategy 3: Inversion

Instead of "what should we add?", ask "what should we remove?" Sometimes the best idea is killing a feature.

Strategy 4: Constraint Removal

Pick one constraint (budget, tech, timeline) and imagine it's gone. What becomes possible? Can we approximate that within constraints?

Strategy 5: User Pain Points

Where do users struggle? What do they complain about? What workarounds do they use?

Strategy 6: Compound Leverage

What existing asset, if extended slightly, unlocks disproportionate value? (existing data, user base, infrastructure, brand)

Generate 10-20 raw ideas. Don't filter yet — quantity first.

Phase 4: Develop Promising Ideas

Select the top 6-8 raw ideas. For each, develop a one-paragraph pitch:

### Idea: [Name]
**What:** One sentence describing the idea
**Who benefits:** Target user/stakeholder
**How:** Rough approach (not detailed plan)
**Why now:** What makes this timely?
**Risk:** What could go wrong?
**Effort:** S/M/L rough estimate

Phase 5: Evaluate and Rank

Score each developed idea against consistent criteria:

Criterion	Weight	Scoring Guide
Impact	30%	How much value does this create? (user satisfaction, revenue, efficiency)
Feasibility	25%	Can we actually build this with current resources/constraints?
Strategic fit	20%	Does this align with the project's direction and strengths?
Novelty	10%	Is this differentiated or table stakes?
Compound potential	15%	Does this unlock future opportunities or leverage existing assets?

Score each 1-5 per criterion. Calculate weighted score.

Phase 6: Present Shortlist

Present the top 3-5 ideas as a ranked table:

## Idea Shortlist

| Rank | Idea | Score | Impact | Effort | Why |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | [Name] | 4.2/5 | High | M | [one-line rationale] |
| 2 | [Name] | 3.9/5 | High | L | [one-line rationale] |
| 3 | [Name] | 3.7/5 | Medium | S | [one-line rationale] |

### Top Pick: [Name]
[2-3 paragraph explanation of why this is the recommendation]

### Runner-ups
[Brief notes on why #2 and #3 didn't win]

### Parking Lot
[Ideas that didn't make the cut but worth revisiting]

Phase 7: Next Steps

Offer to advance the top pick:

• Refine → brainstorming for design dialog
• Decide → tech-pov if it involves a technology choice
• Plan → plan / writing-plans for implementation planning
• Capture → compound-learning if a strategic insight emerged

Modes

Interactive (default)

Walk through phases with user check-ins at Phase 3 (idea dump) and Phase 6 (shortlist).

Headless

Run all phases without interruption. Return the ranked shortlist as structured output.

Pitfalls

• Don't skip grounding — ideas generated without project context are generic and useless
• Don't filter during generation — kill premature criticism; filter in Phase 5
• Don't present unranked lists — the value is in the evaluation, not the brainstorm
• Don't confuse effort with impact — a small idea with high impact beats a big idea with moderate impact
• Don't ignore compound potential — ideas that unlock future options are systematically undervalued
• Don't over-generate — 20 raw ideas is plenty; 50 is procrastination

Integration with Other Skills

• brainstorming — ideate generates options, brainstorming refines one chosen direction
• tech-pov — ideate explores possibilities, tech-pov gives a verdict on a specific choice
• plan — receives the chosen idea and scopes implementation
• compound-learning — grounds ideation in prior learnings; captures strategic insights
• doc-review — can review the idea shortlist before commitment

Hermes Agent Integration

• search_files — ground in project context
• read_file — read strategy/roadmap/learnings
• terminal — git log, project analysis
• delegate_task — research scouts, parallel idea development
• Web tools — competitive research, trend analysis
• write_file — save idea shortlist for reference

Remember

Ground before generating
Quantity first, quality in evaluation
Score against consistent criteria
Lead with the recommendation, not the list
Ideas are cheap; evaluated ideas grounded in context are valuable