Skill and Playbook Ideation: Brainforge Strategy Team Brainstorm (April 2-6, 2026)
Date: 2026-04-18
Context: Internal strategy team meetings (Uttam, Amber, Greg, Advait, Demilade, Pranav, and others)
Goal: Evaluate 8 skill ideas and 4 playbook ideas; rank top 5; classify skill vs playbook; identify quick wins
Summary: Top 5 Ranked Recommendations
| Rank | Idea | Type | Build Status | Priority | Why It Survived |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Stale Ticket Automation (Linear nudge system) | Skill | 🔴 Concept only | 🔥 Quick win | Solves real pain (tickets die silently); builds on existing Linear skills; compounds team accountability |
| 2 | One-Shot Deck Creator (content + visuals unified) | Skill | 🟡 Partial (deck-review exists) | 🔥 Quick win | High-leverage client deliverable; combines with existing deck-review for end-to-end deck workflow |
| 3 | Client Research + Demo Ideation (landing page → demo ideas) | Skill | 🔴 Concept only | 🔥 Quick win | Scales pre-sales; turns generic demos into client-specific proposals; uses web research MCP |
| 4 | Omni Visualization Reuse (grab viz → new dashboards) | Skill | 🟡 Partial (omni-content-explorer exists) | 🔧 Medium build | Reduces dashboard build time significantly; leverages existing Omni skills infrastructure |
| 5 | Industry Metrics Database (what to track per industry) | Playbook | 🔴 Concept only | 🔧 Medium build | Enables CPG Dashboarding Standards and other industry-specific specs; reusable reference for all client work |
Rejected: Daily To-Do Briefing (already built), Deck/Dashboard Review Skill (already built), Dashboard Standards Application (already built as dashboard-spec-grill/init), Industry-Specific Spec Generator (needs #5 first), CPG Dashboarding Standards (needs #5), Data Playbook by Industry (needs #5), Omni Playbook (too broad—use specific skills).
Phase 1: Grounding — What’s Already Built vs Concepts
✅ Already Fully Built (Do Not Duplicate)
| Original Idea | Existing Skill/Playbook | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Daily brief | daily-brief | Daily digest pasted in-chat; Linear, Slack, Calendar, Gmail, Notion, transcripts, vault checkboxes (no outbound send / preference file) |
| Deck/Dashboard Review Skill | brainforge-deck-review | Evaluates decks against Brainforge guidelines; readability, storytelling, factual rigor |
| Dashboard Standards Application | dashboard-spec-grill + dashboard-spec-init | Template-based spec creation + QA against standards |
| Omni Playbook | omni-* skills (13+ skills) | Omni has granular skills: admin, ai-eval, ai-optimizer, content-builder, content-explorer, embed, model-builder, model-explorer, query |
🟡 Partially Built (Build Upon)
| Original Idea | Existing Foundation | Gap to Fill |
|---|---|---|
| One-Shot Deck Creator | brainforge-deck-review exists | Need the creation side: combine content + visuals into client-ready deck (HTML slides or PPTX) |
| Omni Visualization Reuse | omni-content-explorer, omni-query exist | Need skill to discover visualizations from existing dashboards and port to new ones |
🔴 Concept Only (Build from Scratch)
| Original Idea | Why It’s New | Build Complexity |
|---|---|---|
| Client Research + Demo Ideation | No existing research-to-demo workflow | Medium (web research MCP + demo template matching) |
| Stale Ticket Automation | No existing Linear monitoring/nudging | Low (builds on Linear MCP, adds scheduling) |
| Industry-Specific Spec Generator | No industry taxonomy in repo | Medium (needs #5 database first) |
| CPG Dashboarding Standards | No CPG-specific playbook | Medium (needs #5 database as reference) |
| Industry Metrics Database | No centralized metrics reference | Medium (curated knowledge base) |
| Data Playbook by Industry | No industry-specific data playbooks | Medium (needs #5 database first) |
Phase 2: All Ideas Generated and Evaluated
From Original Skill Ideas (8)
1. Daily To-Do Briefing
Status: ✅ ALREADY BUILT — Skip
| Aspect | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Problem it solves | Task fragmentation across tools (Linear, Slack, Gmail, Notion, calendar, transcripts) |
| Current state | Full skill exists with 3 delivery modes (Slack DM, email, chat), aggregates 7+ sources |
| Why reject | Already fully implemented; no gap to fill |
| Action | Document existence in this ideation output; ensure team knows to use /daily-brief |
2. Client Research + Demo Ideation
Status: 🔴 CONCEPT — Build as skill
| Aspect | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Problem it solves | Generic demos don’t convert; preparing client-specific demos takes 30-60 min research |
| Value proposition | Input company landing page URL → infer workflows → propose 3-5 tailored demo ideas |
| Why it survives | Scales pre-sales; turns every prospect into a personalized pitch; uses web research MCP which is reliable |
| Build complexity | Medium (2-3 days) |
| Dependencies | Web research MCP, demo template library (playbook knowledge), optionally HubSpot/Linear to log output |
| Quick win? | ✅ Yes — can start with simple web scraping + GPT pattern matching |
Pros:
- High-leverage for sales (every prospect gets custom demo ideas)
- Uses existing infrastructure (web research MCP)
- Compounds: improves as demo template library grows
Cons:
- Demo ideas need human validation before client send
- Requires maintenance as new demo patterns emerge
Recommendation: Build as skill called client-demo-ideation
3. One-Shot Deck Creator
Status: 🟡 PARTIAL — Extend deck-review into full workflow
| Aspect | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Problem it solves | Creating client-ready decks requires design + content + brand compliance; currently manual |
| Current state | brainforge-deck-review exists for QA, but no creation skill |
| Value proposition | Input content (transcript, spec, outline) → output HTML slides or PPTX ready for review |
| Why it survives | End-to-end deck workflow: create → review → deliver; combines with existing deck-review |
| Build complexity | Medium (3-4 days) |
| Dependencies | brainforge-deck-review (QA step), HTML slide templates (existing), optional pptx skill |
| Quick win? | ✅ Yes — HTML slides are already in repo; can leverage visual-explainer or ckm:slides patterns |
Pros:
- Completes the deck workflow (currently only have QA, not creation)
- Can reuse HTML slide infrastructure
- High-visibility deliverable (client decks are core to Brainforge)
Cons:
- Need to ensure brand compliance (can call deck-review as validation step)
- HTML slides vs PPTX tradeoff (HTML preferred for repo-native)
Recommendation: Build as skill called deck-creator that creates then calls deck-review for validation
4. Deck/Dashboard Review Skill
Status: ✅ ALREADY BUILT — Skip
| Aspect | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Current state | brainforge-deck-review exists with full guidelines coverage |
| Why reject | Fully implemented; 96-line skill with comprehensive rubric |
| Action | Ensure team knows it exists; no new build needed |
5. Stale Ticket Automation
Status: 🔴 CONCEPT — Build as skill
| Aspect | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Problem it solves | Linear tickets get created then die silently; no one monitors “untouched > 7 days” |
| Value proposition | Monitor Linear + Slack for untouched tickets → nudge owner → escalate if no response |
| Why it survives | Solves real team pain; low build effort; compounds accountability culture |
| Build complexity | Low-Medium (1-2 days) |
| Dependencies | Linear MCP, Slack MCP, scheduled execution (cursor hook or cron) |
| Quick win? | ✅ Yes — Linear queries are straightforward; escalation logic is simple |
Pros:
- Addresses visible pain (every team has stale tickets)
- Can start with daily scan → Slack DM to owner
- Builds on existing
linear-*skill patterns - Creates accountability loop (nudge → escalate → close)
Cons:
- Requires scheduled execution (need hook or cron setup)
- Risk of notification fatigue if thresholds wrong
Recommendation: Build as skill called stale-ticket-nudger with configurable thresholds (7 days warning, 14 days escalation)
6. Omni Visualization Reuse
Status: 🟡 PARTIAL — Build discovery-and-port skill
| Aspect | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Problem it solves | Dashboard builders rebuild the same viz types repeatedly; existing viz discovery is manual |
| Current state | omni-content-explorer lists dashboards; omni-query retrieves data; no “grab this viz” workflow |
| Value proposition | Find viz in existing dashboard → port config to new dashboard → adapt to new data model |
| Why it survives | Significant time savings on dashboard builds; leverages existing Omni infrastructure |
| Build complexity | Medium (3-4 days) |
| Dependencies | omni-content-explorer, omni-query, omni-content-builder, YAML parsing |
| Quick win? | 🟡 Medium — need to understand Omni viz config format well |
Pros:
- Reduces dashboard build time (viz config is tedious)
- Uses existing Omni skills (content-explorer, query, builder)
- Compounds: creates internal library of reusable viz patterns
Cons:
- Omni viz configs can be complex (need to map fields correctly)
- Requires understanding of both source and target data models
- Ported viz may need human adjustment
Recommendation: Build as skill called omni-viz-port that: 1) searches existing dashboards, 2) extracts viz config, 3) maps to new data model, 4) creates in target dashboard
7. Dashboard Standards Application
Status: ✅ ALREADY BUILT — Skip
| Aspect | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Current state | dashboard-spec-grill (QA against template) + dashboard-spec-init (create from template) exist |
| Why reject | Fully implemented; applies Jasmin’s Strategy & Analytics standards |
| Action | Ensure team uses these for all dashboard specs |
8. Industry-Specific Spec Generator
Status: 🔴 CONCEPT — Blocked on #5 (Industry Metrics Database)
| Aspect | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Problem it solves | Dashboard specs for CPG, SaaS, Fintech need different KPIs; starting from blank each time |
| Value proposition | Input industry + use case → output dashboard spec with industry-standard KPIs |
| Why it fails this round | Blocked dependency — needs Industry Metrics Database (#5) first; otherwise just guessing |
| Build complexity | Medium (after #5 exists, 2-3 days) |
| Dependencies | Industry Metrics Database playbook, dashboard-spec-init skill |
Recommendation: Defer until Industry Metrics Database (#5) is built; then this becomes a simple wrapper skill
From Original Playbook Ideas (4)
A. CPG Dashboarding Standards
Status: 🔴 CONCEPT — Needs Industry Metrics Database first
| Aspect | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Problem it solves | CPG clients need specific metrics (penetration, velocity, distribution); no standardized reference |
| Why it fails this round | Too narrow to start — should build Industry Metrics Database (#5) first, then CPG is one entry |
| Build complexity | Low-Medium (as one entry in #5 database) |
Recommendation: Fold into Industry Metrics Database as “CPG” category; don’t build standalone playbook
B. Industry Metrics Database
Status: 🔴 CONCEPT — Build as playbook
| Aspect | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Problem it solves | No centralized reference for “what metrics matter for CPG vs SaaS vs Fintech” |
| Value proposition | Curated reference: industry → use case → standard KPIs → calculation logic → dashboard placement |
| Why it survives | Enables #8, A, C; becomes source of truth for all industry-specific work; high compounding |
| Build complexity | Medium (3-5 days curation + structure) |
| Dependencies | None — can start with 3-5 industries and expand |
| Quick win? | 🟡 Medium — requires domain expertise to curate accurately |
Pros:
- Unblocks Industry-Specific Spec Generator (#8)
- Unblocks CPG Dashboarding Standards (#A)
- Unblocks Data Playbook by Industry (#C)
- Becomes reference for all client engagements
Cons:
- Requires accurate curation (wrong metrics = bad client advice)
- Needs ongoing maintenance as industries evolve
Recommendation: Build as playbook industry-metrics-database with sections per industry (CPG, SaaS, Fintech, Healthcare, etc.)
C. Omni Playbook
Status: ❌ REJECT — Too broad
| Aspect | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Why it fails | Too vague — Omni already has 13+ granular skills (omni-admin, omni-ai-eval, omni-content-builder, etc.) |
| Alternative | Use specific omni-* skills; add usage examples to each skill’s reference.md |
| Action | Improve documentation of existing skills; don’t build monolithic playbook |
D. Data Playbook by Industry
Status: 🔴 CONCEPT — Needs Industry Metrics Database first
| Aspect | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Problem it solves | Data strategy differs by industry (CPG needs share-of-shelf; SaaS needs activation curves) |
| Why it fails this round | Needs #5 first — without Industry Metrics Database, this playbook has no source data |
| Build complexity | Medium (after #5 exists) |
Recommendation: Defer; build as extension of Industry Metrics Database once #5 is mature
Phase 3: Cross-Cutting Combinations
Strongest Combination: End-to-End Deck Workflow
deck-creator (new) → creates initial deck
↓
brainforge-deck-review (existing) → QA against guidelines
↓
client-touchpoint-drafter (existing) → draft send message
Value: Turns “create client deck” from 2-3 hour manual task into 15-min agent workflow with built-in quality gates.
Strongest Combination: Linear Hygiene System
stale-ticket-nudger (new) → daily scan + nudge
↓
linear-structure-hygiene (existing) → ensure project/initiative linkage
↓
linear-status-sync (existing) → keep statuses current
Value: Creates closed-loop ticket management: prevent staleness → maintain structure → sync status.
Strongest Combination: Industry-First Dashboarding
industry-metrics-database (new playbook) → curated KPIs per industry
↓
industry-spec-generator (defer until above exists) → generate specs
↓
dashboard-spec-init (existing) → instantiate spec
↓
omni-content-builder (existing) → build dashboard
Value: Industry-specific dashboarding at scale; starts with curated knowledge (#5) and cascades through spec generation to build.
Phase 4: Implementation Priority
🔥 Quick Wins (Build This Week)
| # | Idea | Est. Time | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | Stale Ticket Automation | 1-2 days | Linear MCP, Slack MCP |
| 2 | One-Shot Deck Creator | 2-3 days | HTML slide templates, deck-review skill |
| 3 | Client Research + Demo Ideation | 2-3 days | Web research MCP |
🔧 Medium Builds (Build This Month)
| # | Idea | Est. Time | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6 | Omni Visualization Reuse | 3-4 days | Omni skills infrastructure |
| B | Industry Metrics Database | 3-5 days | Domain expertise for curation |
📋 Deferred (Build After Prerequisites)
| # | Idea | Blocked On |
|---|---|---|
| 8 | Industry-Specific Spec Generator | Industry Metrics Database |
| A | CPG Dashboarding Standards | Industry Metrics Database |
| D | Data Playbook by Industry | Industry Metrics Database |
Phase 5: Survivor Explanations
Why These 5 Survived
1. Stale Ticket Automation
Survival reason: Solves a pain everyone feels (tickets dying silently) with low build cost. The rejection of alternatives with similar build complexity came down to: this has immediate daily utility vs one-time research value.
2. One-Shot Deck Creator
Survival reason: Completes a workflow where we only have QA. High client visibility makes this high-leverage. Combines with existing deck-review for quality gate.
3. Client Research + Demo Ideation
Survival reason: Scales pre-sales effort. Every prospect gets custom demo ideas without 30-min research tax. Uses proven web research MCP.
4. Omni Visualization Reuse
Survival reason: Significant time savings on dashboard builds. Leverages substantial existing Omni infrastructure. Creates compounding library effect.
5. Industry Metrics Database
Survival reason: Unlocks 3 other ideas (#8, A, C). Becomes reference for all industry-specific client work. High compounding value even without automation.
Why Others Were Rejected
| Idea | Rejection Reason |
|---|---|
| Daily To-Do Briefing | Already fully built |
| Deck/Dashboard Review Skill | Already fully built |
| Dashboard Standards Application | Already fully built |
| Omni Playbook | Too broad — use granular omni-* skills |
| Industry-Specific Spec Generator | Blocked on Industry Metrics Database |
| CPG Dashboarding Standards | Too narrow — fold into #5 |
| Data Playbook by Industry | Blocked on Industry Metrics Database |
Appendix: Skill vs Playbook Classification
Skills (Executable Agent Workflows)
| # | Skill Name | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | stale-ticket-nudger | Daily Linear scan + Slack nudge for stale tickets |
| 2 | deck-creator | Content → HTML slides/PPTX with brand compliance |
| 3 | client-demo-ideation | URL → demo ideas for sales |
| 6 | omni-viz-port | Extract viz from dashboard → port to new dashboard |
| 8 | industry-spec-generator | (Deferred) Industry → dashboard spec |
Playbooks (Knowledge + Standards)
| # | Playbook Name | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| B | industry-metrics-database | Curated KPI reference by industry |
| A | cpg-dashboarding-standards | (Deferred) Fold into B |
| D | data-playbook-by-industry | (Deferred) Fold into B |
| C | omni-playbook | (Rejected) Too broad |
Next Steps
- This week: Build
stale-ticket-nudger(quick win, high team value) - This week: Build
deck-creator(completes deck workflow) - Next week: Build
client-demo-ideation(sales enablement) - This month: Build
omni-viz-port(dashboard efficiency) - This month: Curate
industry-metrics-database(unblocks industry-specific work) - After #5: Build
industry-spec-generatorand fold CPG/Fintech standards into database
Generated via ce:ideate workflow — many ideas generated, all critiqued, survivors explained.