Parallel Idea Generation
Generates, scores and prunes ideas across several thinking frames before deepening the best.
Install
npx skills add UditAkhourii/adhd --skill adhd -g -a claude-code -y- Repository
- UditAkhourii/adhd4.5k
- Category
- AI and agents
- Updated
- 10d ago
- License
- MIT
- Context cost
- Mediumabout 2,632 tokens
- Runs scripts
- No, instructions only
What it does
Parallel divergent ideation for coding agents. Spawns N isolated branches under different cognitive frames (regulator, biology, speedrunner, 10-year-old, $0 budget), scores, clusters, prunes traps, and deepens top survivors. Use on /adhd, "ADHD mode", brainstorm/ideate intents, or open-ended design, architecture, naming, API/SDK surface, and fuzzy-debugging decisions. Skip for syntax, lookups, bugs with known root cause, or closed phrasing ("quick", "standard", "canonical", "textbook"). Full pre-flight gate is in the skill body.
ADHD
Stop picking the textbook answer. The first three answers the model would give are the answers a senior engineer would give in thirty seconds. Correct. Forgettable. The interesting answers live past number three, in the awkward middle nobody walks into. This skill makes the model walk there.
Pre-flight (run before Phase 1)
This skill is expensive. About 10 Agent calls, 30 to 90 seconds wall clock, 5 to 10x a single answer. Do not pay that cost when a direct answer is better. Run this gate before Phase 1.
Step 1. Explicit invocation check.
If the user typed /adhd or explicitly asked for ADHD mode, "use the
adhd skill", or "run ADHD on this", SKIP the rest of this section and go
straight to Phase 1. The user opted in. Do not second-guess.
Step 2. Self-judge (only if Step 1 did not match).
Ask yourself three questions. If the answer to any is no, ABORT.
- Open-ended? Would a senior engineer give multiple viable answers here, or is there one canonical answer? If canonical, abort.
- High-stakes? Is the cost of the obvious answer being wrong actually high? Architecture decisions, public API surfaces, naming a real product, fuzzy bugs with no known root cause, schema design = yes. Side project at 11pm = no.
- Open phrasing? Did the user avoid words like "quick", "standard", "canonical", "textbook", "just", "one-line"? If they used any of those, they want the direct answer. Abort.
If all three checks pass, proceed to Phase 1.
If any fails, ABORT and answer the question directly. Optionally append
one sentence: "If you want a wider exploration under parallel cognitive
frames with explicit trap detection, run /adhd <your problem>."
The loop
Two strict phases. Mixing them kills idea quality, because the critic strangles the generator.
Phase 1, Diverge (no critic)
For the problem P:
