writing-plans

Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before writing code or executing experiments

SKILL.md

GitHub

Writing Plans

Overview

Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the executor has zero context for our project and questionable taste. Document everything they need to know: which files to touch for each task, code or protocols, testing or validation, docs they might need to check, how to verify it. Give them the whole plan as bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. Validation-first. Frequent checkpoints.

Assume they are skilled, but know almost nothing about our toolset or problem domain. Assume they don't know good test/validation design very well.

Announce at start: "I'm using the writing-plans skill to create the implementation plan."

Context: This should be run in a dedicated worktree (created by brainstorming skill).

Save plans to: docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<feature-name>.md

Bite-Sized Task Granularity

Each step is one action (2-5 minutes):

For software:

  • "Write the failing test" - step
  • "Run it to make sure it fails" - step
  • "Implement the minimal code to make the test pass" - step
  • "Run the tests and make sure they pass" - step
  • "Commit" - step

For research/experiments:

  • "Define the expected result and validation criteria" - step
  • "Verify data/resources are available" - step
  • "Execute the minimal procedure/analysis" - step
  • "Check output against expected criteria" - step
  • "Checkpoint (save state, commit notebook)" - step

Plan Document Header

Every plan MUST start with this header:

# [Feature/Experiment Name] Implementation Plan

> **For Claude:** REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: Use superpowers:executing-plans to implement this plan task-by-task.

**Goal:** [One sentence describing what this builds/tests/answers]

**Architecture/Approach:** [2-3 sentences about approach]

**Tech Stack/Methods:** [Key technologies, libraries, methods, or protocols]

---

Task Structure

For Software Tasks:

### Task N: [Component Name]

**Files:**
- Create: `exact/path/to/file.py`
- Modify: `exact/path/to/existing.py:123-145`
- Test: `tests/exact/path/to/test.py`

**Step 1: Write the failing test**

```python
def test_specific_behavior():
    result = function(input)
    assert result == expected

Step 2: Run test to verify it fails

Run: pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v Expected: FAIL with "function not defined"

Step 3: Write minimal implementation

def function(input):
    return expected

Step 4: Run test to verify it passes

Run: pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v Expected: PASS

Step 5: Commit

git add tests/path/test.py src/path/file.py
git commit -m "feat: add specific feature"

**For Research/Experiment Tasks:**

```markdown
### Task N: [Analysis/Experiment Name]

**Resources:**
- Data: `exact/path/to/data.csv` or `data source description`
- Script: `analysis/exact/path/to/script.py`
- Output: `results/exact/path/to/output.csv`
- Notebook: `notebooks/exact/path/to/analysis.ipynb`

**Step 1: Define expected outcome**

Success criteria: [Specific measurable outcome]
- Expected range/value: [e.g., "p < 0.05", "AUC > 0.8", "correlation positive"]
- Failure looks like: [e.g., "no significant effect", "data quality issues"]

**Step 2: Verify prerequisites**

Check: Data exists and is valid
Run: `head -5 data/path/file.csv && wc -l data/path/file.csv`
Expected: [N rows, correct columns]

**Step 3: Execute analysis**

```python
# Minimal analysis code
df = pd.read_csv("data/path/file.csv")
result = statistical_test(df["column"])
print(f"Result: {result}")

Step 4: Validate result

Run analysis and check:

  • Does result match expected criteria?
  • Are there any warnings or anomalies?
  • Is output in expected format?

Step 5: Checkpoint

git add analysis/script.py results/output.csv
git commit -m "analysis: complete [specific analysis]"

Or for notebooks: Save notebook, export key results


## Remember

- Exact file/data paths always
- Complete code/commands in plan (not "add validation")
- Exact commands with expected output
- Reference relevant skills with @ syntax
- DRY, YAGNI, validation-first, frequent checkpoints
- For experiments: include expected ranges and failure criteria

## Execution Handoff

After saving the plan, offer execution choice:

**"Plan complete and saved to `docs/plans/<filename>.md`. Two execution options:**

**1. Subagent-Driven (this session)** - I dispatch fresh subagent per task, review between tasks, fast iteration

**2. Parallel Session (separate)** - Open new session with executing-plans, batch execution with checkpoints

**Which approach?"**

**If Subagent-Driven chosen:**
- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use superpowers:subagent-driven-development
- Stay in this session
- Fresh subagent per task + code review

**If Parallel Session chosen:**
- Guide them to open new session in worktree
- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** New session uses superpowers:executing-plans