Major improvements to brainstorm synthesis specification:
1. Output Definition Unification (Critical)
- Remove synthesis-report.md references
- Unify to synthesis-specification.md as single output
- Update all metadata and descriptions
2. Execution Model Clarification (High)
- Change "Direct Execution Only" to "Direct Execution by Main Claude"
- Clarify: Main Claude + Read/Write/Glob + cognitive analysis
- Emphasize avoiding context transmission loss
3. Dynamic Role Discovery (High)
- Replace hardcoded 9-role list with runtime discovery
- Scan .brainstorming/* directories for actual analysis.md files
- Support flexible participation (1 to 9+ roles)
- Update metadata to reflect dynamic role counts
4. Enhanced Document Structure (Critical)
- Add "Key Designs & Decisions" section
* Core architecture diagrams (Mermaid)
* User journey maps (images)
* Data model overview (ERD)
* Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)
- Add "Controversial Points & Alternatives" section
* Document disagreements and rejected alternatives
* Preserve decision context and rationale
* Track dissenting roles
- Add "Process & Collaboration Concerns" section
* Team capability assessment
* Process risks and mitigation
* Collaboration patterns
* Timeline constraints
5. Requirements Table Enhancement (Medium)
- Add "Rationale Summary" column to all requirement tables
- Reduce over-reliance on @ references
- Provide immediate context for better readability
6. Responsibility Clarification
- synthesis-specification.md: Defines "WHAT" (requirements, design)
- IMPL_PLAN.md: Defines "HOW" (executable tasks)
- Clear handoff between brainstorm and planning phases
7. Updated Quality Assurance Standards
- Visual Clarity: Diagrams required
- Decision Transparency: Alternatives documented
- No Role Marginalization: Process roles equally visible
- Context-Rich: Rationale included
- Decision Traceability: @ references maintained
Related: plan.md improvements for auto-continue clarity and synthesis integration
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
19 KiB
name, description, usage, argument-hint, examples, allowed-tools
| name | description | usage | argument-hint | examples | allowed-tools | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| synthesis | Generate synthesis-specification.md from topic-framework and role analyses with @ references | /workflow:brainstorm:synthesis | no arguments required - synthesizes existing framework and role analyses |
|
Read(*), Write(*), TodoWrite(*), Glob(*) |
🧩 Synthesis Document Generator
Core Function
Specialized command for generating synthesis-specification.md that integrates topic-framework.md and all role analysis.md files using @ reference system. Creates comprehensive implementation specification with cross-role insights.
Dynamic Role Discovery: Automatically detects which roles participated in brainstorming by scanning for */analysis.md files. Synthesizes only actual participating roles, not predefined lists.
Primary Capabilities
- Dynamic Role Discovery: Automatically identifies participating roles at runtime
- Framework Integration: Reference topic-framework.md discussion points across all discovered roles
- Role Analysis Integration: Consolidate all discovered role/analysis.md files using @ references
- Cross-Framework Comparison: Compare how each participating role addressed framework discussion points
- @ Reference System: Create structured references to source documents
- Update Detection: Smart updates when new role analyses are added
- Flexible Participation: Supports any subset of available roles (1 to 9+)
Document Integration Model
Three-Document Reference System:
- topic-framework.md → Structured discussion framework (input)
- [role]/analysis.md → Role-specific analyses addressing framework (input)
- synthesis-specification.md → Complete integrated specification (output)
⚙️ Execution Protocol
⚠️ Direct Execution by Main Claude
Execution Model: Main Claude directly executes this command without delegating to sub-agents.
Rationale:
- Full Context Access: Avoids context transmission loss that occurs with Task tool delegation
- Complex Cognitive Analysis: Leverages main Claude's complete reasoning capabilities for cross-role synthesis
- Tool Usage: Combines Read/Write/Glob tools with main Claude's analytical intelligence
DO NOT use Task tool - Main Claude performs intelligent analysis directly while reading/writing files, ensuring no information loss from context passing.
Phase 1: Document Discovery & Validation
# Detect active brainstorming session
CHECK: .workflow/.active-* marker files
IF active_session EXISTS:
session_id = get_active_session()
brainstorm_dir = .workflow/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/
ELSE:
ERROR: "No active brainstorming session found"
EXIT
# Validate required documents
CHECK: brainstorm_dir/topic-framework.md
IF NOT EXISTS:
ERROR: "topic-framework.md not found. Run /workflow:brainstorm:artifacts first"
EXIT
Phase 2: Role Analysis Discovery
# Dynamically discover available role analyses
SCAN_DIRECTORY: .workflow/WFS-{session}/.brainstorming/
FIND_ANALYSES: [
Scan all subdirectories for */analysis.md files
Extract role names from directory names
]
# Available roles (for reference, actual participation is dynamic):
# - product-manager
# - product-owner
# - scrum-master
# - system-architect
# - ui-designer
# - ux-expert
# - data-architect
# - subject-matter-expert
# - test-strategist
LOAD_DOCUMENTS: {
"topic_framework": topic-framework.md,
"role_analyses": [dynamically discovered analysis.md files],
"participating_roles": [extract role names from discovered directories],
"existing_synthesis": synthesis-specification.md (if exists)
}
# Note: Not all roles participate in every brainstorming session
# Only synthesize roles that actually produced analysis.md files
Phase 3: Update Mechanism Check
# Check for existing synthesis
IF synthesis-specification.md EXISTS:
SHOW current synthesis summary to user
ASK: "Synthesis exists. Do you want to:"
OPTIONS:
1. "Regenerate completely" → Create new synthesis
2. "Update with new analyses" → Integrate new role analyses
3. "Preserve existing" → Exit without changes
ELSE:
CREATE new synthesis
Phase 4: Synthesis Generation Process
Initialize synthesis task tracking:
[
{"content": "Validate topic-framework.md and role analyses availability", "status": "in_progress", "activeForm": "Validating source documents"},
{"content": "Load topic framework discussion points structure", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Loading framework structure"},
{"content": "Cross-analyze role responses to each framework point", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Cross-analyzing framework responses"},
{"content": "Generate synthesis-specification.md with @ references", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Generating synthesis with references"},
{"content": "Update session metadata with synthesis completion", "status": "pending", "activeForm": "Updating session metadata"}
]
Phase 5: Cross-Role Analysis Execution
Dynamic Role Processing: The number and types of roles are determined at runtime based on actual analysis.md files discovered in Phase 2.
5.1 Data Collection and Preprocessing
# Iterate over dynamically discovered role analyses
FOR each discovered_role IN participating_roles:
role_directory = brainstorm_dir + "/" + discovered_role
# Load role analysis (required)
role_analysis = Read(role_directory + "/analysis.md")
# Load optional artifacts if present
IF EXISTS(role_directory + "/recommendations.md"):
role_recommendations[discovered_role] = Read(role_directory + "/recommendations.md")
END IF
# Extract insights from analysis
role_insights[discovered_role] = extract_key_insights(role_analysis)
role_recommendations[discovered_role] = extract_recommendations(role_analysis)
role_concerns[discovered_role] = extract_concerns_risks(role_analysis)
role_diagrams[discovered_role] = identify_diagrams_and_visuals(role_analysis)
END FOR
# Log participating roles for metadata
participating_role_count = COUNT(participating_roles)
participating_role_names = participating_roles
5.2 Cross-Role Insight Analysis
# Consensus identification (across all participating roles)
consensus_areas = identify_common_themes(role_insights)
agreement_matrix = create_agreement_matrix(role_recommendations)
# Disagreement analysis (track which specific roles disagree)
disagreement_areas = identify_conflicting_views(role_insights)
tension_points = analyze_role_conflicts(role_recommendations)
FOR each conflict IN disagreement_areas:
conflict.dissenting_roles = identify_dissenting_roles(conflict)
END FOR
# Innovation opportunity extraction
innovation_opportunities = extract_breakthrough_ideas(role_insights)
synergy_opportunities = identify_cross_role_synergies(role_insights)
5.3 Priority and Decision Matrix Generation
# Create comprehensive evaluation matrix
FOR each recommendation:
impact_score = calculate_business_impact(recommendation, role_insights)
feasibility_score = calculate_technical_feasibility(recommendation, role_insights)
effort_score = calculate_implementation_effort(recommendation, role_insights)
risk_score = calculate_associated_risks(recommendation, role_insights)
priority_score = weighted_score(impact_score, feasibility_score, effort_score, risk_score)
END FOR
SORT recommendations BY priority_score DESC
📊 Output Specification
Output Location
The synthesis process creates one consolidated document that integrates all role perspectives:
.workflow/WFS-{topic-slug}/.brainstorming/
├── topic-framework.md # Input: Framework structure
├── [role]/analysis.md # Input: Role analyses (multiple)
└── synthesis-specification.md # ★ OUTPUT: Complete integrated specification
synthesis-specification.md Structure (Complete Specification)
Document Purpose: Defines "WHAT" to build - comprehensive requirements and design blueprint. Scope: High-level features, requirements, and design specifications. Does NOT include executable task breakdown (that's IMPL_PLAN.md's responsibility).
# [Topic] - Integrated Implementation Specification
**Framework Reference**: @topic-framework.md | **Generated**: [timestamp] | **Session**: WFS-[topic-slug]
**Source Integration**: All brainstorming role perspectives consolidated
**Document Type**: Requirements & Design Specification (WHAT to build)
## Executive Summary
Strategic overview with key insights, breakthrough opportunities, and implementation priorities.
## Key Designs & Decisions
### Core Architecture Diagram
```mermaid
graph TD
A[Component A] --> B[Component B]
B --> C[Component C]
Reference: @system-architect/analysis.md#architecture-diagram
User Journey Map
Reference: @ux-expert/analysis.md#user-journey
Data Model Overview
erDiagram
USER ||--o{ ORDER : places
ORDER ||--|{ LINE-ITEM : contains
Reference: @data-architect/analysis.md#data-model
Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)
ADR-01: [Decision Title]
- Context: Background and problem statement
- Decision: Chosen approach
- Rationale: Why this approach was selected
- Reference: @system-architect/analysis.md#adr-01
Controversial Points & Alternatives
| Point | Adopted Solution | Alternative Solution(s) | Decision Rationale | Dissenting Roles |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Authentication | JWT Token (@security-expert) | Session-Cookie (@system-architect) | Stateless API support for multi-platform | System Architect noted session performance benefits |
| UI Framework | React (@ui-designer) | Vue.js (@subject-matter-expert) | Team expertise and ecosystem maturity | Subject Matter Expert preferred Vue for learning curve |
This section preserves decision context and rejected alternatives for future reference.
Requirements & Acceptance Criteria
Functional Requirements
| ID | Description | Rationale Summary | Source | Priority | Acceptance | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FR-01 | User authentication | Enable secure multi-platform access | @product-manager/analysis.md | High | User can login via email/password | None |
| FR-02 | Data export | User-requested analytics feature | @product-owner/analysis.md | Medium | Export to CSV/JSON | FR-01 |
Non-Functional Requirements
| ID | Description | Rationale Summary | Target | Validation | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NFR-01 | Response time | UX research shows <200ms critical | <200ms | Load testing | @ux-expert/analysis.md |
| NFR-02 | Data encryption | Compliance requirement | AES-256 | Security audit | @security-expert/analysis.md |
Business Requirements
| ID | Description | Rationale Summary | Value | Success Metric | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BR-01 | User retention | Market analysis shows engagement gap | High | 80% 30-day retention | @product-manager/analysis.md |
| BR-02 | Revenue growth | Business case justification | High | 25% MRR increase | @product-owner/analysis.md |
Design Specifications
UI/UX Guidelines
Consolidated from: @ui-designer/analysis.md, @ux-expert/analysis.md
- Component specifications and interaction patterns
- Visual design system and accessibility requirements
- User flow and interface specifications
Architecture Design
Consolidated from: @system-architect/analysis.md, @data-architect/analysis.md
- System architecture and component interactions
- Data flow and storage strategy
- Technology stack decisions
Domain Expertise & Standards
Consolidated from: @subject-matter-expert/analysis.md
- Industry standards and best practices
- Compliance requirements and regulations
- Technical quality and domain-specific patterns
Process & Collaboration Concerns
Consolidated from: @scrum-master/analysis.md, @product-owner/analysis.md
Team Capability Assessment
| Required Skill | Current Level | Gap Analysis | Mitigation Strategy | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kubernetes | Intermediate | Need advanced knowledge | Training + external consultant | @scrum-master/analysis.md |
| React Hooks | Advanced | Team ready | None | @scrum-master/analysis.md |
Process Risks
| Risk | Impact | Probability | Mitigation | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cross-team API dependency | High | Medium | Early API contract definition | @scrum-master/analysis.md |
| UX-Dev alignment gap | Medium | High | Weekly design sync meetings | @ux-expert/analysis.md |
Collaboration Patterns
- Design-Dev Pairing: UI Designer and Frontend Dev pair programming for complex interactions
- Architecture Reviews: Weekly arch review for system-level decisions
- User Testing Cadence: Bi-weekly UX testing sessions with real users
- Reference: @scrum-master/analysis.md#collaboration
Timeline Constraints
- Blocking Dependencies: Project-X API must complete before Phase 2
- Resource Constraints: Only 2 backend developers available in Q1
- External Dependencies: Third-party OAuth provider integration timeline
- Reference: @scrum-master/analysis.md#constraints
Implementation Roadmap (High-Level)
Development Phases
Phase 1 (0-3 months): Foundation and core features Phase 2 (3-6 months): Advanced features and integrations Phase 3 (6+ months): Optimization and innovation
Technical Guidelines
- Development standards and code organization
- Testing strategy and quality assurance
- Deployment and monitoring approach
Feature Grouping (Epic-Level)
- High-level feature grouping and prioritization
- Epic-level dependencies and sequencing
- Strategic milestones and release planning
Note: Detailed task breakdown into executable work items is handled by /workflow:plan → IMPL_PLAN.md
Risk Assessment & Mitigation
Critical Risks Identified
- Risk: Description | Mitigation: Strategy
- Risk: Description | Mitigation: Strategy
Success Factors
- Key factors for implementation success
- Continuous monitoring requirements
- Quality gates and validation checkpoints
Complete implementation specification consolidating all role perspectives into actionable guidance
## 🔄 **Session Integration**
### Streamlined Status Synchronization
Upon completion, update `workflow-session.json`:
**Dynamic Role Participation**: The `participating_roles` and `roles_synthesized` values are determined at runtime based on actual analysis.md files discovered.
```json
{
"phases": {
"BRAINSTORM": {
"status": "completed",
"synthesis_completed": true,
"completed_at": "timestamp",
"participating_roles": ["<dynamically-discovered-role-1>", "<dynamically-discovered-role-2>", "..."],
"available_roles": ["product-manager", "product-owner", "scrum-master", "system-architect", "ui-designer", "ux-expert", "data-architect", "subject-matter-expert", "test-strategist"],
"consolidated_output": {
"synthesis_specification": ".workflow/WFS-{topic}/.brainstorming/synthesis-specification.md"
},
"synthesis_quality": {
"role_integration": "complete",
"requirement_coverage": "comprehensive",
"decision_transparency": "alternatives_documented",
"process_risks_identified": true,
"implementation_readiness": "ready"
},
"content_metrics": {
"roles_synthesized": "<COUNT(participating_roles)>",
"functional_requirements": "<dynamic-count>",
"non_functional_requirements": "<dynamic-count>",
"business_requirements": "<dynamic-count>",
"architecture_decisions": "<dynamic-count>",
"controversial_points": "<dynamic-count>",
"diagrams_included": "<dynamic-count>",
"process_risks": "<dynamic-count>",
"team_skill_gaps": "<dynamic-count>",
"implementation_phases": "<dynamic-count>",
"risk_factors_identified": "<dynamic-count>"
}
}
}
}
Example with actual values:
{
"phases": {
"BRAINSTORM": {
"status": "completed",
"participating_roles": ["product-manager", "system-architect", "ui-designer", "ux-expert", "scrum-master"],
"content_metrics": {
"roles_synthesized": 5,
"functional_requirements": 18,
"controversial_points": 2
}
}
}
}
✅ Quality Assurance
Required Synthesis Elements
- Integration of all available role analyses with comprehensive coverage
- Key Designs & Decisions: Architecture diagrams, user journey maps, ADRs documented
- Controversial Points: Disagreement points, alternatives, and decision rationale captured
- Process Concerns: Team capability gaps, process risks, collaboration patterns identified
- Quantified priority recommendation matrix with evaluation criteria
- Actionable implementation plan with phased approach
- Comprehensive risk assessment with mitigation strategies
Synthesis Analysis Quality Standards
- Completeness: Integrates all available role analyses without gaps
- Visual Clarity: Key diagrams (architecture, data model, user journey) included via Mermaid or images
- Decision Transparency: Documents not just decisions, but alternatives and why they were rejected
- Insight Generation: Identifies cross-role patterns and deep insights
- Actionability: Provides specific, executable recommendations with rationale
- Balance: Considers all role perspectives, including process-oriented roles (Scrum Master)
- Forward-Looking: Includes long-term strategic and innovation considerations
Output Validation Criteria
- Priority-Based: Recommendations prioritized using multi-dimensional evaluation
- Context-Rich: Each requirement includes rationale summary for immediate understanding
- Resource-Aware: Team skill gaps and constraints explicitly documented
- Risk-Managed: Both technical and process risks captured with mitigation strategies
- Measurable Success: Clear success metrics and monitoring frameworks
- Clear Actions: Specific next steps with assigned responsibilities and timelines
Integration Excellence Standards
- Cross-Role Synthesis: Successfully identifies and documents role perspective conflicts
- No Role Marginalization: Process, UX, and compliance concerns equally visible as functional requirements
- Strategic Coherence: Recommendations form coherent strategic direction
- Implementation Readiness: Plans detailed enough for immediate execution, with clear handoff to IMPL_PLAN.md
- Stakeholder Alignment: Addresses needs and concerns of all key stakeholders
- Decision Traceability: Every major decision traceable to source role analysis via @ references
- Continuous Improvement: Establishes framework for ongoing optimization and learning