I’m building Zextha, a visual workspace for exploring the system around an idea. This is a short walkthrough of the product workflow and the decisions behind it.
The problem: a prompt leaves things unsaid
“I want to build a learning companion” describes an intention. It does not tell us who will use it, what environment it needs to work in, or how we will know it helps. Starting implementation immediately can hide those unknowns inside the design.
Zextha gives the early thinking a visible structure:
- Describe the idea in your own words.
- Answer four questions tailored to that idea.
- Explore a map of perspectives and their relationships.
- Use the map to decide what to investigate or try next.
Four questions should earn their place
A fixed budget–goal–timeline checklist is convenient, but it can miss the questions that matter for a particular project.
For a learning companion, device access and the learner’s context may be important. For a content creator, the audience and a sustainable format may matter more. These are examples of useful questions, not a promise that every generated session uses the same wording.
The goal is to collect context that can change the map, while keeping the interaction short.
A map is an interface for investigation
A useful node should give you something to examine: a dependency, constraint, risk, choice, or next action. Connections help show why one decision affects another.
For example, choosing an offline-first experience affects storage, synchronization, content updates, and how failures are explained. Treating “offline support” as a single checkbox would hide much of that work.
The output still needs human review. A generated map is not an exhaustive architecture review or evidence that an idea will work. It is a way to make the next discussion more concrete.
Reading and references have different jobs
Zextha’s Notes area contains original field books with chapters that can be read inside the workspace. Documents helps readers understand why a reference matters and follow it to the original source.
Keeping those experiences distinct matters: reading a chapter and evaluating a source are different tasks.
An optional perspective for agents
Zextha also exposes an MCP connection for compatible clients. An agent can request a read-only perspective on an idea, an approach, or next steps. It does not automatically inspect your files or take control of your project; the client supplies the context.
The connection details are available in the MCP workspace.
Try it with a real uncertainty
If you explore Zextha, try an idea you are still unsure about. Look for one useful connection, then verify it against the real requirements.
I’d welcome feedback from builders: what information would make a system map useful before you start implementation?
Disclosure: I’m Zextha’s founder. This post was prepared with AI assistance.
Top comments (0)