Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Open-ended scientific ideation partner. Use for research gaps, mechanism exploration, interdisciplinary connections, assumptions, possible research directions, and lightweight literature matrix or A+B paper-combination idea mapping. For structured testable hypotheses and validation plans, use hypothesis-generation instead.
.claude/skills/foryourhealth111-pixel-scientific-brainstorming/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 46% | 0% |
| case-12 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 18% | 0% |
| case-07 | ✓→✓ | = Same ✓ | 27% | 0% |
| case-03 | ✓→✓ | = Same ✓ | -6% | 0% |
| case-04 | ✓→✓ | = Same ✓ | 6% | 0% |
Scientific brainstorming is a conversational process for generating novel research ideas. Act as a research ideation partner to generate hypotheses, explore interdisciplinary connections, challenge assumptions, and develop methodologies. Apply this skill for creative scientific problem-solving.
This skill should be used when:
When engaging in scientific brainstorming:
Begin by deeply understanding what the scientist is working on. This phase establishes the foundation for productive ideation.
Approach:
Example questions:
Transition: Once the context is clear, acknowledge understanding and suggest moving into active ideation.
Help the scientist generate a wide range of ideas without judgment. The goal is quantity and diversity, not immediate feasibility.
Techniques to employ:
Interaction style:
references/brainstorming_methods.md when the session needs a named structured techniqueHelp identify patterns, themes, and unexpected connections among the generated ideas.
Approach:
Prompts:
For literature-combination work, keep the matrix lightweight: list candidate papers or methods, compare complementarity, data compatibility, theory fit, implementation cost, and likely innovation value. Do not turn this into a separate routed workflow.
Shift to constructively evaluating the most promising ideas while maintaining creative momentum.
Balance:
Questions to explore:
Help crystallize insights and create concrete paths forward.
Deliverables:
Close with encouragement:
Contains detailed descriptions of structured brainstorming methodologies for sessions that need a named method:
Use this file when the scientist requests a specific methodology or when the brainstorming session would benefit from a more structured approach.
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-07 | pass→pass | 16,190 | 9,982 | -38% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,363 | 2,993 | +27% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | 22,159 | 17,336 | -22% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,379 | 4,182 | +24% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 20,627 | 18,158 | -12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,293 | 4,423 | +34% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | pass→pass | 21,152 | 9,565 | -55% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,158 | 2,972 | -6% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | pass→pass | 22,045 | 12,379 | -44% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,254 | 3,464 | +6% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | 16,956 | 15,640 | -8% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,666 | 3,956 | +48% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 18,669 | 10,657 | -43% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,018 | 3,088 | +2% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | 18,770 | 9,228 | -51% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,717 | 2,766 | +2% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→fail | 16,173 | 11,148 | -31% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,461 | 3,112 | +26% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 13,062 | 9,762 | -25% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,150 | 3,149 | +46% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | 15,733 | 7,687 | -51% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,340 | 2,803 | +20% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | 14,141 | 8,627 | -39% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,387 | 2,827 | +18% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→fail | 17,567 | 11,976 | -32% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,524 | 3,473 | +38% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 14,797 | 13,844 | -6% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,215 | 3,723 | +68% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | 8,069 | 5,731 | -29% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,265 | 2,410 | +91% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 18,325 | 10,657 | -42% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,765 | 3,196 | +16% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | 28,616 | 14,944 | -48% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 6,188 | 4,384 | -29% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 19,032 | 14,846 | -22% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,025 | 3,791 | +25% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 18,638 | 15,532 | -17% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,959 | 3,900 | +32% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→fail | 23,431 | 22,316 | -5% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,147 | 5,328 | +28% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | 30,095 | 7,545 | -75% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 5,374 | 2,690 | -50% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | fail→fail | 14,030 | 16,687 | +19% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,841 | 3,835 | +35% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +9 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.