Immutable. This exact content is served forever at /api/v1/blob/c2a0d22910faf0bd.
---
name: codex-brainstorm
description: "Adversarial brainstorming via Claude+Codex debate. Use when: exploring solutions, feasibility analysis, exhaustive enumeration. Not for: implementation (use feature-dev), architecture only (use codex-architect). Output: Nash equilibrium consensus + action items."
allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash(ls:*), Bash(find:*), Bash(node:*), Write
---
# Codex Brainstorm Skill
## Trigger
- Keywords: brainstorm, exhaust possibilities, explore solutions, deep discussion, feasibility analysis, solution exploration, Nash equilibrium
## When NOT to Use
- Simple technical Q&A (answer directly)
- Already have a clear solution (implement directly)
- Only need code review (use `/codex-review`)
## Core Principle
```
⚠️ Independent Research → Adversarial Debate → Nash Equilibrium ⚠️
Nash Equilibrium = Neither party can unilaterally change strategy to achieve a better outcome
```
## Workflow
| Phase | Action | Output |
| ----- | ------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------- |
| 1 | **Claude independent research** + analysis, forms Position A | Claude's optimal hypothesis |
| 2 | **Codex independent research** + analysis, forms Position B | Codex's optimal hypothesis |
| 3 | Multi-round adversarial debate, mutual attacks | Debate exchange record |
| 4 | Check equilibrium, no further improvements possible | Equilibrium or divergence |
| 5 | Output final report | Nash Equilibrium report |
### Phase 2: Codex Independent Research (Critical)
**⚠️ Must let Codex research independently; do NOT feed Claude's analysis results ⚠️**
Dispatch this body per `@skills/codex-code-review/references/codex-transport.md` § Start — a **fresh** thread for Phase 2. The transport pins the
sandbox and the approval policy, so nothing is chosen here. **Save the returned `threadId`**; the
Phase 3 debate rounds continue that same thread per its § Resume (`references/techniques.md`).
Bind every placeholder before writing `prompt.md` — nothing evaluates an expression in a body-only
template.
You are a senior architect. Conduct an **independent analysis** of the following topic.
## Topic
${TOPIC}
## Constraints
${CONSTRAINTS}
## ⚠️ Important: You must research independently ⚠️
Before forming conclusions, you **must** first:
1. Discover the directory structure: `ls` at the repository root, then list the directories it actually shows — do not assume a `src/` or `test/unit/` layout; many repositories, this one included, have neither
2. Search related code: `grep -rn "keyword" . -l | head -10` — rooted at the repository, or at a directory the discovery step above actually surfaced; never at an assumed `src/`
3. Read relevant files to confirm existing implementations
## Output Requirements
1. Research summary (related modules, existing patterns)
2. Your position + supporting arguments
3. Potential risks
### Phase 3: Adversarial Debate
Structure per round:
1. Claude attacks flaws in Codex's proposal
2. Codex rebuts or updates position
3. Equilibrium check: Can either side raise new attacks?
### Termination Conditions
| Condition | Description | Result |
| ----------------- | ---------------------------------------- | ------------------- |
| Nash Equilibrium | Neither side can raise new attacks | Output equilibrium |
| Convergence | Both positions converge | Output consensus |
| Max rounds | 5 rounds reached with remaining divergence | Output divergence report |
## Verification
- [ ] Claude formed an independent position (not following Codex)
- [ ] Codex performed code research (not speculating)
- [ ] At least 3 rounds of adversarial debate
- [ ] Each round has clear attack/defense records
- [ ] Final report indicates equilibrium status
## References
| File | Purpose |
| ---------------- | ------------------------------ |
| `references/templates.md` | Claude/debate/report templates |
| `references/techniques.md` | Attack/defense techniques |
| `references/equilibrium.md` | Equilibrium determination flow |
## Example
```
Input: What implementation approaches are available for this requirement?
Phase 1: Claude independent research → Position A (Solution X is optimal)
Phase 2: Codex independent research → Position B (Solution Y is optimal)
Phase 3: Adversarial debate
- R1: Claude attacks Y's scalability / Codex attacks X's complexity
- R2: Claude rebuts / Codex concedes and updates position
- R3: Both converge to Solution Z, no further attacks → Equilibrium
Phase 4: Output Nash Equilibrium = Solution Z
```