chore(brainstorming): restore LF line endings

skills/brainstorming/SKILL.md

@@ -1,41 +1,41 @@
----
-name: brainstorming
-description: "Brainstorm from diverse perspectives through fresh subagents, then synthesize their insights. Explicit request only."
-disable-model-invocation: true
----
-
-# Brainstorming
-
-Explore the invoking request through fresh, independent perspectives, then
-synthesize a coherent landscape of ideas. Ground every worker in the topic,
-goal, known facts, constraints, and desired outcome.
-
-## Design and dispatch the perspectives
-
-Choose at least three pairwise-distinct lenses suited to the topic. Examples
-include stakeholder needs, feasibility, failure, assumption inversion, analogy,
-second-order effects, and time horizons. Add a lens when it covers consequential
-territory the others miss; avoid duplicating perspectives to increase the count.
-
-Write each prompt independently so its questions and thinking operation embody
-its lens. Include enough shared facts to work without conversation history,
-limit the assignment to analysis and response, and request concrete insights
-with their reasoning.
-
-Spawn one fresh subagent per prompt that does not inherit this conversation:
-in Codex pass `fork_turns: "none"`; in Claude Code start a new general-purpose
-agent rather than a fork. Workers use the caller's model and reasoning effort:
-in Codex leave `model` and `reasoning_effort` unset; in Claude Code set `model`
-to the caller's model, because an unset model can resolve to a configured
-subagent default. Run independent prompts in
-parallel when capacity allows; otherwise dispatch as slots become available.
-Do not claim the requested fan-out occurred when fresh subagents are unavailable.
-
-## Synthesize
-
-Consider every worker's contribution. Explain the strongest ideas, unique
-angles, recurring themes, tensions, and useful combinations. Preserve meaningful
-disagreement and use parent judgment instead of treating consensus as proof.
-Include open questions when another round would resolve something consequential.
-The result should make the useful possibilities and tradeoffs clear without
-repeating the workers' reports in full.
+---
+name: brainstorming
+description: "Brainstorm from diverse perspectives through fresh subagents, then synthesize their insights. Explicit request only."
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+# Brainstorming
+
+Explore the invoking request through fresh, independent perspectives, then
+synthesize a coherent landscape of ideas. Ground every worker in the topic,
+goal, known facts, constraints, and desired outcome.
+
+## Design and dispatch the perspectives
+
+Choose at least three pairwise-distinct lenses suited to the topic. Examples
+include stakeholder needs, feasibility, failure, assumption inversion, analogy,
+second-order effects, and time horizons. Add a lens when it covers consequential
+territory the others miss; avoid duplicating perspectives to increase the count.
+
+Write each prompt independently so its questions and thinking operation embody
+its lens. Include enough shared facts to work without conversation history,
+limit the assignment to analysis and response, and request concrete insights
+with their reasoning.
+
+Spawn one fresh subagent per prompt that does not inherit this conversation:
+in Codex pass `fork_turns: "none"`; in Claude Code start a new general-purpose
+agent rather than a fork. Workers use the caller's model and reasoning effort:
+in Codex leave `model` and `reasoning_effort` unset; in Claude Code set `model`
+to the caller's model, because an unset model can resolve to a configured
+subagent default. Run independent prompts in
+parallel when capacity allows; otherwise dispatch as slots become available.
+Do not claim the requested fan-out occurred when fresh subagents are unavailable.
+
+## Synthesize
+
+Consider every worker's contribution. Explain the strongest ideas, unique
+angles, recurring themes, tensions, and useful combinations. Preserve meaningful
+disagreement and use parent judgment instead of treating consensus as proof.
+Include open questions when another round would resolve something consequential.
+The result should make the useful possibilities and tradeoffs clear without
+repeating the workers' reports in full.