Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/LucasDuys/forgenpx agentmods add skills/lucasduys/forge/brainstormingWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/lucasduys/forge/brainstorming)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lucasduys/forge/brainstorming"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lucasduys/forge/brainstorming/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lucasduys/forge/brainstorming"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lucasduys/forge/brainstorming.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 62 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
- medium Agent Snooping · line 166 Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00023 | $0.04388 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.01755 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00878 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00439 |
Grade A, and why
brainstorming scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 336 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Brainstorming Skill
You are running the Forge brainstorming workflow. Your job is to turn a user's idea into one or more concrete specification files with R-numbered requirements and testable acceptance criteria.
Inputs
The user provides one of:
- A topic (plain text describing what they want to build)
--from-codeflag (analyze the existing codebase to generate specs)--from-docs PATHflag (read documents from PATH, extract requirements)
Workflow
Phase 1: Complexity Detection
Before asking questions, determine the scope of the user's request.
Analyze the topic (or codebase/documents) and classify complexity:
| Level | Signals | Question Count |
|---|---|---|
| Simple (single feature, few files, clear scope) | Bug fix, small enhancement, single endpoint, UI tweak | 3-4 questions |
| Medium (multi-component, new feature with defined scope) | Multiple files across directories, needs tests, some cross-component work | 5-7 questions |
| Complex (multi-domain, architectural decisions, cross-repo) | New system/subsystem, security-sensitive, unfamiliar tech, multi-repo | Decompose into sub-projects first, then 5-7 questions per sub-project |
Hard cadence bounds for every run: minimum 3 questions, maximum 7 questions before the proposal stage. If a complex project seems to need more, decompose into sub-projects and run a separate bounded Q&A per sub-project rather than exceeding 7 in a single run.
Scoring heuristics (each signal adds 1 point):
- Multiple files across 2+ directories: +1
- Cross-component dependencies: +1
- Cross-repo work needed: +2
- Architectural decisions required: +2
- Security-sensitive code: +1
- New system or subsystem: +2
- Unfamiliar technology or novel approach: +1
- Multi-domain decomposition needed: +2
Score 0-3 = Simple, 4-7 = Medium, 8+ = Complex.
Tell the user the detected complexity and how many questions you will ask. Example: "This looks like a medium complexity project. I'll ask 6 questions to nail down the spec, one at a time."
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 2mo ago First seen · 336 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 595831fe3c29
brainstorming is a skill published in the GitHub repository LucasDuys/forge (58 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 4,388 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
tdd
Test-driven development with red-green-refactor loop. Use when user wants to build features or fix bugs using TDD, mentions "red-green-refactor", wants integration tests, or asks for test-first development.
screen-reader-testing
Test web applications with screen readers including VoiceOver, NVDA, and JAWS. Use when validating screen reader compatibility, debugging accessibility issues, or ensuring assistive technology support.
temporal-python-testing
Test Temporal workflows with pytest, time-skipping, and mocking strategies. Covers unit testing, integration testing, replay testing, and local development setup. Use when implementing Temporal workflow tests or debugging test failures.
e2e-testing-patterns
Master end-to-end testing with Playwright and Cypress to build reliable test suites that catch bugs, improve confidence, and enable fast deployment. Use when implementing E2E tests, debugging flaky tests, or establishing testing standards.
workflow-patterns
Use this skill when implementing tasks according to Conductor's TDD workflow, handling phase checkpoints, managing git commits for tasks, or understanding the verification protocol.
create-formal-verification-skill
Generate a project-local skill that formally verifies the code where a bug costs the most and tests reach the least, in any language, with whichever verification tool fits. Use for /create-formal-verification-skill, "model-check this race", "prove this invariant", or when concurrency, retries, state machines, parsers…