plan
Creates detailed implementation plan from validated research. Produces task breakdown with dependencies.
Best use case
plan is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Creates detailed implementation plan from validated research. Produces task breakdown with dependencies.
Teams using plan should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/plan/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How plan Compares
| Feature / Agent | plan | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Creates detailed implementation plan from validated research. Produces task breakdown with dependencies.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# Plan Skill
Creates detailed implementation plan from validated research.
---
## Purpose
The Plan skill transforms validated research into an actionable implementation plan:
```
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ PLANNING FRAMEWORK │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ ┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────┐ ┌────────────┐ │
│ │ RESEARCH │──▶│ ARCHITECT │──▶│ TASK │──▶│ VERIFY │ │
│ │ INPUT │ │ DECISIONS │ │ BREAKDOWN │ │ PLAN │ │
│ └─────────────┘ └─────────────┘ └─────────────┘ └────────────┘ │
│ │ │ │ │ │
│ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ │
│ • Requirements • Approach • Atomic tasks • Traceability│
│ • Codebase map • Patterns • Dependencies • Completeness│
│ • Risks • Components • Sequence • Feasibility │
│ │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
```
---
## Agent Compatibility
- AskUserQuestion: use the tool in Claude Code; in Codex CLI, ask the user directly and record the answer.
- OUTPUT_DIR: `.claude/output` for Claude Code, `.codex/output` for Codex CLI.
## Planning Phases
### Phase 1: Architectural Decisions
Before task breakdown, make key architectural decisions:
### Phase 1.5: MANDATORY Edge Case Review
**CRITICAL: This phase is BLOCKING. Cannot proceed to Phase 2 until all edge cases are clarified.**
Before proceeding to task breakdown:
1. **List all edge cases** discovered during planning:
- Empty states
- Error states
- Boundary conditions
- Null/zero values
- Missing data scenarios
---
#### P-Checkpoints (Plan Questions)
**P1: Edge Case Behavior**
For each edge case without explicit PRD guidance:
```
AskUserQuestion(
questions: [
{
question: "Edge case: '{scenario}'. What should happen?",
header: "Edge Case",
options: [
{ label: "Show empty state", description: "Display 'No data' or similar message" },
{ label: "Show default value", description: "Display '--' or 0" },
{ label: "Hide element", description: "Don't render the component at all" },
{ label: "Show error", description: "Display error message to user" }
],
multiSelect: false
}
]
)
```
**P2: Architecture Decision**
For each architectural choice with trade-offs:
```
AskUserQuestion(
questions: [
{
question: "For '{component}', should we use '{Option A}' or '{Option B}'?",
header: "Architecture",
options: [
{ label: "Option A", description: "Benefits: X. Trade-off: Y" },
{ label: "Option B", description: "Benefits: Y. Trade-off: X" },
{ label: "Discuss further", description: "Need more context to decide" }
],
multiSelect: false
}
]
)
```
**P3: Scope Boundary**
When scope is unclear:
```
AskUserQuestion(
questions: [
{
question: "Should '{feature X}' be included in this implementation?",
header: "Scope",
options: [
{ label: "Yes, include", description: "Add to current implementation scope" },
{ label: "No, defer", description: "Create follow-up ticket for later" },
{ label: "Partial", description: "Include basic version only, enhance later" }
],
multiSelect: false
}
]
)
```
---
2. **Document in plan:**
```markdown
## Edge Case Decisions (User Confirmed)
| Checkpoint | Edge Case | User Decision | Date |
|------------|-----------|---------------|------|
| P1 | All items defective | Show "–" | 2024-01-01 |
| P2 | State management | Use existing controller | 2024-01-01 |
| P3 | Export feature | Defer to next sprint | 2024-01-01 |
```
**Rules:**
1. NEVER assume edge case behavior - ASK
2. NEVER proceed with unconfirmed edge cases
3. Document all user decisions with checkpoint ID
4. Each P-checkpoint MUST be resolved before Phase 2
**Plan Phase Complete Criteria:**
```
□ All P1 checkpoints resolved (all edge cases have defined behavior)
□ All P2 checkpoints resolved (architecture decisions made)
□ All P3 checkpoints resolved (scope boundaries clear)
```
---
```
Decision Framework:
├── Approach Selection
│ ├── What pattern to follow?
│ ├── Create new vs extend existing?
│ └── Which components to use?
│
├── Data Flow Design
│ ├── API → Repository → Service → Controller → UI
│ └── State management approach
│
├── UI Architecture
│ ├── Screen structure
│ ├── Widget decomposition
│ └── Navigation flow
│
└── Integration Points
├── Existing services to use
├── New services needed
└── External dependencies
```
### Phase 2: Task Decomposition
Break implementation into atomic, sequential tasks:
#### Task Properties
```
Task {
id: string // T1, T2, T3...
title: string // Short description
description: string // Detailed description
type: enum {
model, // Data models (Equatable + ReturnValue)
api, // API client methods
repository, // Repository layer
service, // Service layer
controller, // StateNotifier controller
state, // State class
screen, // Screen widget
widget, // Reusable widget
navigation, // Routing
test, // Unit/widget tests
integration // Integration/cleanup
}
layer: enum {
data,
domain,
application,
presentation
}
files: string[] // Files to create/modify
requirements: string[] // Requirement IDs this addresses
dependencies: string[] // Task IDs this depends on
complexity: enum {
trivial, // < 30 min
low, // 30 min - 1 hr
medium, // 1-2 hrs
high // 2+ hrs
}
risks: string[]
acceptanceCriteria: string[]
}
```
#### Task Ordering Rules
```
1. Foundation First
- Models before services
- Services before controllers
- Controllers before screens
2. Data Layer → Domain → Application → Presentation
- Response models (data/)
- Domain models (domain/)
- Services & mappers (application/)
- Controllers & screens (presentation/)
3. Dependencies Respected
- Task cannot start until dependencies complete
- No circular dependencies
4. Test Adjacent
- Unit tests with related code
- Integration tests after feature complete
```
### Phase 3: File Planning
For each file to create/modify:
```
File Plan {
path: string // Full file path
action: enum {
create, // New file
modify, // Existing file
delete // Remove file (rare)
}
purpose: string // Why this file
contentOutline: string // High-level structure
patterns: string[] // Patterns to apply (from AGENTS.md)
references: string[] // Similar files to reference
}
```
### Phase 4: Test Strategy
Define testing approach:
```
Test Strategy {
unitTests: [
{
target: string, // Class/function to test
scenarios: string[], // Test scenarios
mocks: string[] // Dependencies to mock
}
],
widgetTests: [
{
target: string, // Widget to test
interactions: string[] // User interactions to test
}
],
integrationTests: [
{
flow: string, // User flow to test
steps: string[] // Test steps
}
]
}
```
---
## Task Templates by Type
### Model Task (Equatable + ReturnValue)
```markdown
### Task: Create {ModelName} Response Model
**Type**: model | **Layer**: data | **Complexity**: low
**Files**:
- Create: `lib/src/features/{feature}/data/{model_name}_response.dart`
**Description**:
Create response model for {API endpoint} using Equatable + ReturnValue pattern.
**Implementation**:
```dart
class {ModelName}Response extends Equatable {
// Properties from API
const {ModelName}Response({...});
factory {ModelName}Response.fromJson(Map<String, dynamic> json) {
return {ModelName}Response(
// Use ReturnValue for all fields
);
}
Map<String, dynamic> toJson() => {...};
{ModelName}Response copyWith({...}) => {...};
@override
List<Object?> get props => [...];
}
```
**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] All API fields mapped
- [ ] Uses ReturnValue for JSON parsing
- [ ] Has copyWith method
- [ ] Has props for Equatable
```
### Controller Task (StateNotifier)
```markdown
### Task: Create {Feature}Controller
**Type**: controller | **Layer**: presentation | **Complexity**: medium
**Files**:
- Create: `lib/src/features/{feature}/presentation/{name}/{name}_controller.dart`
- Create: `lib/src/features/{feature}/presentation/{name}/{name}_state.dart`
**Description**:
Create StateNotifier controller for {feature} screen.
**Implementation Pattern**:
```dart
// State
class {Feature}State {
final AsyncValue<Data> dataValue;
// other state properties
const {Feature}State({...});
{Feature}State copyWith({...}) => {...};
}
// Controller
class {Feature}Controller extends StateNotifier<{Feature}State> {
{Feature}Controller({required this.service}) : super(const {Feature}State());
final {Feature}Service service;
Future<void> loadData() async {
state = state.copyWith(dataValue: const AsyncLoading());
final result = await service.getData();
result.when(
success: (data) => state = state.copyWith(dataValue: AsyncData(data)),
failure: (error) => state = state.copyWith(errorMessage: error.message),
);
}
}
// Provider
final {feature}ControllerProvider = StateNotifierProvider<{Feature}Controller, {Feature}State>((ref) {
return {Feature}Controller(service: ref.read({feature}ServiceProvider));
});
```
**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] Follows StateNotifier pattern
- [ ] Has loading/error/success states
- [ ] Provider properly defined
```
### Screen Task
```markdown
### Task: Create {Feature}Screen
**Type**: screen | **Layer**: presentation | **Complexity**: medium
**Files**:
- Create: `lib/src/features/{feature}/presentation/{name}/{name}_screen.dart`
**Description**:
Create screen widget for {feature}.
**Implementation Pattern**:
```dart
class {Feature}Screen extends ConsumerWidget {
const {Feature}Screen({super.key});
static const routeName = '/{feature}';
@override
Widget build(BuildContext context, WidgetRef ref) {
final state = ref.watch({feature}ControllerProvider);
return Scaffold(
appBar: AppBarWidget(...),
body: state.dataValue.when(
data: (data) => _buildContent(data),
loading: () => const LoadingWidget(),
error: (e, _) => ErrorWidget(message: e.toString()),
),
);
}
}
```
**UI Components** (separate widget classes):
- {Feature}Header
- {Feature}Content
- {Feature}Footer
**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] Uses ConsumerWidget
- [ ] Handles loading/error/data states
- [ ] Uses project styling (TypographyTheme, ColorApp, Gap)
- [ ] Separate widget classes (no _buildX methods)
```
---
## Output Template
Generate `OUTPUT_DIR/plan-{feature}.md`:
```markdown
# Implementation Plan: {Feature Name}
## Metadata
- **Date**: {YYYY-MM-DD}
- **Based On**: research-{feature}.md
- **PRD Reference**: {URL/source}
- **Estimated Tasks**: {count}
- **Complexity**: {low/medium/high}
---
## 1. Executive Summary
### Feature Overview
{Brief description of what will be implemented}
### Scope
- **In Scope**: {what's included}
- **Out of Scope**: {what's not included}
### Key Decisions
| Decision | Choice | Rationale |
|----------|--------|-----------|
| {decision} | {choice} | {why} |
---
## 2. Architecture
### 2.1 Component Diagram
```
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ PRESENTATION │
│ ┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────┐ │
│ │ Screen │ │ Controller │ │ State │ │
│ └─────────────┘ └─────────────┘ └─────────────┘ │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ APPLICATION │
│ ┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────┐ │
│ │ Service │ │ Mapper │ │
│ └─────────────┘ └─────────────┘ │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ DOMAIN │
│ ┌─────────────┐ │
│ │ Model │ │
│ └─────────────┘ │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ DATA │
│ ┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────┐ │
│ │ Response │ │ Repository │ │
│ └─────────────┘ └─────────────┘ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
```
### 2.2 Data Flow
```
API Response
↓
{Feature}Response (data/)
↓
{Feature}Model (domain/) [via Mapper]
↓
{Feature}Service (application/)
↓
{Feature}Controller (presentation/)
↓
{Feature}Screen (presentation/)
```
### 2.3 State Management
```dart
// State structure
{Feature}State {
dataValue: AsyncValue<{Model}>
// other fields
}
```
---
## 3. Task Breakdown
### 3.1 Task Summary
| ID | Task | Type | Layer | Complexity | Dependencies |
|----|------|------|-------|------------|--------------|
| T1 | ... | model | data | low | - |
| T2 | ... | service | application | medium | T1 |
### 3.2 Task Sequence
```
Phase 1: Data Layer
├── T1: Create response models
└── T2: Create/update repository
Phase 2: Domain Layer
└── T3: Create domain models
Phase 3: Application Layer
├── T4: Create mapper
└── T5: Create service
Phase 4: Presentation Layer
├── T6: Create state
├── T7: Create controller
├── T8: Create widgets
└── T9: Create screen
Phase 5: Integration
├── T10: Add navigation
├── T11: Add tests
└── T12: Integration testing
```
### 3.3 Detailed Tasks
---
#### T1: {Task Title}
**Type**: {type} | **Layer**: {layer} | **Complexity**: {complexity}
**Dependencies**: {none or task IDs}
**Requirements Addressed**: R1, R2
**Files**:
| Action | Path |
|--------|------|
| Create | `lib/src/features/{feature}/...` |
**Description**:
{Detailed description of what to implement}
**Implementation Notes**:
- {specific guidance}
- {patterns to follow}
**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] {criterion 1}
- [ ] {criterion 2}
---
#### T2: {Next Task}
...
---
## 4. File Inventory
### 4.1 New Files
| Path | Purpose | Template |
|------|---------|----------|
| `lib/src/features/{feature}/data/{name}_response.dart` | API response | Equatable |
| `lib/src/features/{feature}/domain/{name}_model.dart` | Domain model | Equatable |
| `lib/src/features/{feature}/application/{name}_service.dart` | Business logic | - |
| `lib/src/features/{feature}/presentation/{name}/{name}_screen.dart` | UI | ConsumerWidget |
| `lib/src/features/{feature}/presentation/{name}/{name}_controller.dart` | State mgmt | StateNotifier |
| `lib/src/features/{feature}/presentation/{name}/{name}_state.dart` | State class | copyWith |
### 4.2 Modified Files
| Path | Changes |
|------|---------|
| `lib/src/routing/app_router.dart` | Add route |
| `lib/src/services/remote/api/{api}_client.dart` | Add endpoint |
### 4.3 Reference Files
| Path | Why Reference |
|------|---------------|
| `lib/src/features/{similar}/...` | Similar pattern |
---
## 5. Test Strategy
### 5.1 Unit Tests
| Target | Test File | Scenarios |
|--------|-----------|-----------|
| {Service} | `test/.../service_test.dart` | success, error, edge cases |
| {Controller} | `test/.../controller_test.dart` | state transitions |
### 5.2 Widget Tests
| Target | Scenarios |
|--------|-----------|
| {Screen} | loading, data display, error, interactions |
### 5.3 Integration Tests
| Flow | Steps |
|------|-------|
| {User flow} | {step sequence} |
---
## 6. Requirement Traceability
| Requirement | Tasks | Status |
|-------------|-------|--------|
| R1: {desc} | T1, T2, T5 | Planned |
| R2: {desc} | T3, T6 | Planned |
---
## 7. Risk Mitigation
| Risk | Mitigation | Tasks Affected |
|------|------------|----------------|
| {risk} | {mitigation} | T1, T2 |
---
## 8. Checklist Before Implementation
- [ ] Research validated (audit passed)
- [ ] All requirements traced to tasks
- [ ] Dependencies are clear
- [ ] File paths verified (no conflicts)
- [ ] Patterns match AGENTS.md
- [ ] User approved plan
```
---
## Prompt
When user invokes `/plan`, execute:
```
I will now create an implementation plan from the validated research.
## Prerequisites Check
1. Checking for research file: research-{feature}.md
2. Verifying research was audited and passed
## Phase 1: Architectural Decisions
Making key decisions:
- Pattern approach: {decision}
- Data flow: {decision}
- Component structure: {decision}
## Phase 2: Task Decomposition
Breaking down implementation into atomic tasks...
[Generate task list with dependencies]
## Phase 3: File Planning
Identifying files to create/modify:
- New files: {count}
- Modified files: {count}
## Phase 4: Test Strategy
Defining test approach:
- Unit tests: {count}
- Widget tests: {count}
- Integration tests: {count}
## Output
[Generate plan-{feature}.md]
## Summary
| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Total Tasks | {count} |
| Complexity | {level} |
| New Files | {count} |
| Modified Files | {count} |
Ready for plan audit? [Proceeding to /audit plan]
```
---
## Progress Tracking (MANDATORY when called from RPI)
**If this skill is invoked as part of an RPI workflow, you MUST update progress:**
### On Plan Start
```bash
~/.claude/skills/scripts/rpi-progress.sh --phase plan --status in_progress --last "Starting planning" --next "Complete implementation plan"
```
### On Plan Complete (before audit)
```bash
~/.claude/skills/scripts/rpi-progress.sh --phase plan --status complete --last "Plan complete" --next "Plan audit"
```
### After Plan Audit Pass
```bash
~/.claude/skills/scripts/rpi-progress.sh --audit plan --passed true --score {score} --last "Plan audit passed" --next "Await user approval"
```
### Progress Values
- Plan started: 20%
- Plan complete: 25%
- Plan audit pass: 30%
- User approval: 35%Related Skills
sw-tech-stack-planner
Use when user wants a tech stack recommendation, technology choices, docker-compose setup, or architecture decisions for a software project – reads vision.md, user-stories.md, use-cases.md and generates requirements/tech-stack.yaml silently.
self-explanatory-code-commenting
Guidelines for GitHub Copilot to write comments to achieve self-explanatory code with less comments. Examples are in JavaScript but it should work on any language that has comments. Triggers on: **
prd-planner
Analyzes PRDs and creates beads task breakdown for multi-agent implementation
plans-management
Manages Plans.md tasks and marker operations. Use when user mentions タスクを追加, Plans.md更新, 完了マーク, タスク状態変更, add task, update plans, mark complete. Do NOT load for: 実装作業, レビュー, Plans.md以外のファイル操作.
planning-with-files
Transforms workflow to use Manus-style persistent markdown files for planning, progress tracking, and knowledge storage. Use when starting complex tasks, multi-step projects, research tasks, or when the user mentions planning, organizing work, tracking progress, or wants structured output.
plan-writing
Structured task planning with clear breakdowns, dependencies, and verification criteria. Use when implementing features, refactoring, or any multi-step work.
plan-reduce-max-lines
This skill should be used when reducing the maximum class/module lines threshold and fixing all violations. It updates the RuboCop configuration, identifies classes and modules exceeding the new limit, generates a brief with refactoring strategies, and creates a plan with tasks to split oversized files.
plan-maker
Create implementation plans with testable acceptance criteria, validation strategies, integration touchpoints, and risk analysis before coding begins.
niko-plan
Niko Memory Bank System - Plan Phase - Implementation Planning
implementation-planner
专业的软件架构师,根据用户需求和设计方案创建详细的实施(开发)计划。将设计方案转化为可执行的任务列表,支持测试驱动开发和渐进式实现。
dev-workflow-planning
Structured development workflows using /brainstorm, /write-plan, and /execute-plan patterns. Transform ad-hoc conversations into systematic project execution with hypothesis-driven planning, incremental implementation, and progress tracking.
default-planner
Analyze user requests and create executable task plans for any type of work. Use this skill when the work type is unclear, spans multiple domains (frontend+backend+infra), or doesn't fit specialized planners. Triggered by general requests like "build an app", "create a system", or "implement a solution".