Use this skill when:
Works with
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versiondesign-thinkingExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches design-thinking from melodic-software/claude-code-plugins and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate design-thinking. Access via /design-thinking in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example
Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example
Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example
Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
0
total installs
0
this week
46
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
0
installs
0
this week
46
stars
Use this skill when:
A human-centered approach to innovation that integrates the needs of people, the possibilities of technology, and the requirements for business success.
Design Thinking is a problem-solving methodology developed by IDEO and taught at Stanford d.school. It emphasizes understanding users, challenging assumptions, redefining problems, and creating innovative solutions through iterative prototyping and testing.
| Principle | Description |
|---|---|
| Human-Centered | Start with people, not technology or process |
| Embrace Ambiguity | Comfortable with uncertainty early on |
| Bias to Action | Learn by doing, not just thinking |
| Radical Collaboration | Cross-functional, diverse perspectives |
| Iterate Rapidly | Fail fast, learn fast, improve fast |
┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│EMPATHIZE│→│ DEFINE │→│ IDEATE │→│PROTOTYPE│→│ TEST │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│Understand│ │Frame the│ │Generate │ │Build to │ │Learn & │
│the user │ │problem │ │ideas │ │learn │ │refine │
└─────────┘ └─────────┘ └─────────┘ └─────────┘ └─────────┘
▲ │
└────────────────── Iterate ─────────────────────────┘
| Phase | Mode | Key Question | Output |
|---|---|---|---|
| Empathize | Diverge | What is the user experiencing? | Insights, observations |
| Define | Converge | What is the core problem? | POV statement |
| Ideate | Diverge | What are possible solutions? | Ideas, concepts |
| Prototype | Converge | How can we make it tangible? | Prototypes |
| Test | Learn | What works and what doesn't? | Validated learning |
Build deep understanding of users and their experiences.
| Method | Duration | Participants | Best For |
|---|---|---|---|
| User Interviews | 30-60 min | 1:1 | Deep individual insight |
| Observation | Hours-days | Field work | Natural behavior |
| Empathy Mapping | 15-30 min | Workshop | Synthesizing research |
| Journey Mapping | 1-2 hours | Workshop | Experience visualization |
| Shadowing | Half-day | Field work | Workflow understanding |
## Empathy Map: [User/Persona Name]
### Says
[Direct quotes from interviews/observation]
- "[Quote 1]"
- "[Quote 2]"
### Thinks
[What might they be thinking? Hopes/fears?]
- [Thought 1]
- [Thought 2]
### Does
[Actions and behaviors observed]
- [Behavior 1]
- [Behavior 2]
### Feels
[Emotional state, what worries/excites them]
- [Emotion 1]
- [Emotion 2]
### Pains
[Frustrations, obstacles, risks]
- [Pain 1]
- [Pain 2]
### Gains
[Wants, needs, measures of success]
- [Gain 1]
- [Gain 2]
## User Interview Guide
**Duration:** 45-60 minutes
**Objective:** [What we want to learn]
### Opening (5 min)
- Introduce yourself and purpose
- Explain confidentiality, recording consent
- "There are no right or wrong answers"
### Context (10 min)
- Tell me about your role/day-to-day
- How long have you been doing [X]?
- Walk me through a typical [scenario]
### Deep Dive (25 min)
- Tell me about a time when [specific experience]
- What was the most challenging part?
- What did you try? What happened?
- How did that make you feel?
### Needs & Desires (10 min)
- If you could wave a magic wand, what would change?
- What would that enable you to do?
- What does success look like for you?
### Closing (5 min)
- Is there anything else you'd like to share?
- Can we follow up if we have questions?
Synthesize observations and frame the right problem.
## POV Statement
**User:** [Specific user type/persona]
**Need:** [Verb - what they need to do]
**Insight:** [Because - surprising insight about why]
---
**Full Statement:**
[User] needs to [need] because [insight].
**Example:**
A busy working parent needs to quickly prepare healthy meals
because they want to model good eating habits for their children
but feel guilty about the time-cost tradeoff.
Transform POV into actionable opportunity statements:
## How Might We Questions
**POV:** [Your POV statement]
### HMW Brainstorm
Generate HMW questions by asking:
| Lens | Question | HMW |
|------|----------|-----|
| **Amplify the good** | What's working? | HMW do more of [good thing]? |
| **Remove the bad** | What's painful? | HMW eliminate [pain point]? |
| **Explore the opposite** | What if we flipped it? | HMW [opposite approach]? |
| **Question assumptions** | What's assumed? | HMW if [assumption] wasn't true? |
| **Change status quo** | What's expected? | HMW change when/where/who? |
| **Break it into parts** | What are components? | HMW address just [component]? |
### Selected HMW Questions
1. HMW [question 1]?
2. HMW [question 2]?
3. HMW [question 3]?
**Priority HMW:** [The one to ideate on]
Generate a wide range of creative solutions.
| Rule | Description |
|---|---|
| Defer judgment | No criticism during brainstorming |
| Go for quantity | More ideas = better ideas |
| Build on others' ideas | "Yes, and..." |
| Encourage wild ideas | Think big, no constraints |
| Be visual | Sketch, don't just talk |
| One conversation | Listen, build, riff |
| Stay focused | Keep the HMW visible |
## Ideation Session
**HMW:** [The How Might We question]
**Duration:** 30-45 minutes
**Participants:** [Names]
### Warm-Up (5 min)
[Quick creative exercise to loosen up]
### Silent Brainstorm (10 min)
- Write one idea per sticky note
- Work individually
- Aim for 10+ ideas each
### Share & Build (15 min)
- Share ideas one by one
- Build on others' ideas
- No criticism, only "Yes, and..."
### Cluster & Theme (10 min)
- Group similar ideas
- Name each cluster
- Identify promising directions
### Ideas Generated
| Cluster | Ideas | Count |
|---------|-------|-------|
| [Theme 1] | [List] | [N] |
| [Theme 2] | [List] | [N] |
### Top Ideas to Prototype
1. [Idea 1]
Prerequisites
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
anthropics/claude-code
leonxlnx/taste-skill
sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
erichowens/some_claude_skills
hyperb1iss/hyperskills
omer-metin/skills-for-antigravity
design-thinking is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
design-thinking reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
design-thinking is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
design-thinking fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
design-thinking is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
Keeps context tight: design-thinking is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
We added design-thinking from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
We added design-thinking from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
Keeps context tight: design-thinking is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
design-thinking has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
showing 1-10 of 30