ce-plan
Skill26k starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Create structured plans for multi-step work, including software and non-software tasks. Use when asked to plan, break down implementation, plan from requirements, or deepen an existing plan; prefer ce-brainstorm for exploratory framing.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 6 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
6
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 11
An explicit invocation always produces a plan: Never classify a direct invocation as "not a planning task" and route out.
- Distinctive: line 13
Research, decide, and write the plan — never implement: Do not write production code, run tests, or learn from execution-time results.
- Very specific: line 41
Output first: Read references/output-mode.md before interpreting any phase.
- Very specific: line 42
Resume, deepen, approach, and domain: Read references/resume.md before acting.
- Very specific: line 47
Read references/research.md before gathering context.
- Very specific: line 48
Read references/structure.md before resolving questions or structuring the plan.
- Very specific: line 53
Read references/final-review.md before the pre-write review.
- Very specific: line 56
Write the plan before presenting options, then complete the confidence path final-review.md defines.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Create Technical Plan
Outcome: a plan for carrying out and checking the agreed work while preserving its outcome and constraints. Resolve technical choices from evidence; leave adequate instructions unchanged. ce-brainstorm defines WHAT, ce-plan plans HOW, and ce-work executes. A prior brainstorm is optional.
An explicit invocation always produces a plan. Never classify a direct invocation as "not a planning task" and route out. It may select any output contract below, and the smallest valid plan is a few sentences in chat.
Research, decide, and write the plan — never implement. Do not write production code, run tests, or learn from execution-time results. Directional pseudo-code and grammar sketches may communicate design; changing code to see what happens belongs in ce-work.
Mandatory Completion Contract
A run is complete when its output contract's done condition is met. Every normal interactive branch that produces a plan artifact or checkpoint is incomplete until the user has been asked what to do next. A request that already authorizes the next action is that answer. For a Durable software implementation-plan run that continues past the resume check, that means the Phase 5.4 menu has been presented and the selected action has actually fired. For Direct, the change stated and the handoff offered; for a Chat brief, the brief and its one-line save-or-ce-work offer in chat. Neither presents the Phase 5.4 menu. Non-software plans and approach-level plans end with the handoff their reference workflow defines. A run that only answers a question may end after the answer unless its reference requires a save or share step.
Writing the file, checking confidence, and running or explicitly skipping ce-doc-review are intermediate milestones. In pipeline mode, the run is complete only when the plan, the confidence check, and the non-interactive document-review state have been returned to the caller, which decides what happens next.
Interaction Method
Ask one question at a time through the host's blocking question tool already in the current tool list. Match by capability; never probe a user-facing tool to discover it. If none is listed or a real question call errors, render numbered choices in chat; never silently skip a required question. If no feature description was supplied, ask what to plan and wait.
Output Contract
Decide which output contract applies at the start of scoping (Phase 0.6), before choosing depth and before the scoping synthesis. It applies only when no resume route (Phase 0.1) fired and the source check (Phase 0.2) found no upstream artifact. Ground it with bounded inline reads of what the request names, without dispatching a subagent. Select one:
- Direct — the work can be stated, done, and verified in one pass with no decision the user would weigh. State the change in a few sentences and offer the handoff to
ce-workor the user; execution starts only with implementation authority, asreferences/output-contracts.mddefines. - Chat brief — bounded work with at most one decision the user would weigh and no risk surface. Deliver it in chat and stop.
- Durable — everything else. Continue the workflow below.
references/output-contracts.md defines Direct and Chat brief; read it when either is selected. When the tier is still uncertain after those reads, take the heavier one. If a read surfaces a decision the user would weigh, a risk surface, or multi-pass verification, move to the heavier tier before emitting anything. Durable regardless of size: a run with no synchronous user to act on chat this turn (pipeline, headless, goal- or scheduler-driven), a request whose wording asks for a plan, a plan file, or an output format, a request that continues an existing plan's item, and a risk surface — authentication, payments, migrations, external contracts.
Workflow
Phases run in order unless a reference routes out or short-circuits. Read a phase's required reference in full when you enter that phase; a read made before that phase does not satisfy it, and a reference named for the final steps is read again at its step even when already in context. If a required reference cannot be read, stop before the action it governs and report the blocker and recovery path; never reconstruct the missing rules from memory. In pipeline mode, every required-reference failure returns status: blocked, phase, blocker, and recovery_path; include artifact_path and preserve the artifact when one exists. Report blocked even when an artifact exists.
Phase 0: Output, Resume, and Scope
- Output first. Read
references/output-mode.mdbefore interpreting any phase. It defines token parsing, output and confirmation precedence, renderer selection, artifact location, and when a repository may be resolved. - Resume, deepen, approach, and domain. Read
references/resume.mdbefore acting. It defines resuming an existing plan, enriching a requirements-only plan, deepening, approach-level planning, and the software/non-software split. Follow any terminal route it selects; otherwise continue. - Source and scope. Read
references/intake.mdbefore Phase 0.2 and follow it through Phase 0.7. It defines finding and preserving the upstream artifact, routing out to bootstrap work, blocking questions, depth, named resources, and the scoping synthesis; the Output Contract decision above happens inside it. Do not pass a decision point that has not resolved.
Phases 1-4: Research and Compose
- Read
references/research.mdbefore gathering context. - Read
references/structure.mdbefore resolving questions or structuring the plan. - Compose from
references/plan-sections.mdplus the format-rendering reference selected byoutput-mode.md.
Phase 5: Review, Write, Deepen, and Hand Off
- Read
references/final-review.mdbefore the pre-write review; it defines Phase 5.1 through 5.3.2. On an interactive run from a brainstorm, the user sees the Phase 5.1.5 scoping synthesis in chat before the write: a confirmation to wait on, or its one-line auto-proceed announcement. - Model elevation. Immediately before authoring, read
references/reasoning-elevation.md, resolve the choice at this boundary, and follow it. Do not author until activation resolution has completed and any selected dispatch or transparent fallback has settled. - In pipeline mode, evidence that invalidates a decision settled earlier in the session stops the write. Return the exact token
settled-decision-invalidated, the decision, and the reason; do not resolve it silently. - Write the plan before presenting options, then complete the confidence path
final-review.mddefines.
STOP. Read references/plan-handoff.md immediately before Phase 5.3.8 and 5.4 (document review and the handoff menu). Document review is mandatory for a Durable plan and the default is non-interactive (mode:non-interactive). In interactive software runs, ask exactly: "Plan ready at <absolute path to plan>. What would you like to do next?" Present its menu and wait. If the selection arrives after a user turn, reload references/plan-handoff.md before acting. Rendering the menu, receiving a selection, or announcing a route is not completion; execute the selected action.
Trending
Quiet since July.thin dataabout the whole repository
Who's talking about EveryInc/every-marketplace
- AI LABS“How to 10X Your Claude Code Workflow”YouTube · Oct 12, 2025 · 28k views
- A Hacker News story“Compounding Engineering for Claude Code”Hacker News · Oct 11, 2025 · 2 points
- EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin“Request to merge PR #11 - Comprehensive standardization”GitHub · Nov 11, 2025 · 1 reactions
- aj-ebels/rapid-scribe“Add Every compound-engineering plugin marketplace to project settings”GitHub · Jul 7, 2026
- EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin“Installing via README vs guide”GitHub · Feb 25, 2026
The biggest 5 of 12 mentions linking to the repository that our crawl found. Each line is their own headline.
See all 12
Talked about on GitHub, YouTube and Hacker News (12 times).
On GitHub · 10
- Nov 11, 2025Request to merge PR #11 - Comprehensive standardization — EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin1 reaction · 1 comment
- Jul 7, 2026Add Every compound-engineering plugin marketplace to project settings — aj-ebels/rapid-scribe0 reactions
- Feb 25, 2026Installing via README vs guide — EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin0 reactions · 3 comments
- Nov 30, 2025Compound engineering Command not installed with Droid — EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin0 reactions · 8 comments
- Nov 25, 2025feat: Add plan mode support to /issue, /architect, and /product-manager commands — psd401/psd-claude-plugins0 reactions · 1 comment
5 more on GitHub
- Nov 18, 2025Install compounding-engineering plugin from Every marketplace — ThePharmer/stepmania0 reactions
- Nov 13, 2025Enhance issue with planner — minyk/lazy-bird0 reactions
- Nov 6, 2025feat: install Compounding Engineering plugin from Every marketplace — nerdymil30/gmail_classifier_speckit0 reactions
- Oct 15, 2025Add one-command installation option via Claude Plugins CLI — EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin0 reactions · 1 comment
- Oct 10, 2025Claude v 2.013 - Failed to closne repository.. — EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin0 reactions · 1 comment
On YouTube · 1
- Oct 12, 2025How to 10X Your Claude Code Workflow — AI LABS28k views · 197 comments
On Hacker News · 1
- Oct 11, 2025Compounding Engineering for Claude Code2 points
Other versions5 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 2
- EveryInc/compounding-engineering-plugin★ 26k100% same
- EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin★ 26k100% same
Edited · 1
- kieranklaassen/compound-engineering-plugin★ 26k99% same
Wrote their own version · 2
- shyamsridhar123/kevin-copilot★ 7same name
- Pdbjork/hermosskills-site★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository37 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- ce-skill-workSkill
- ce-babysit-prSkill
- ce-bakeoffSkill
- ce-brainstormSkill
- ce-code-reviewSkill
- ce-commit-push-prSkill
- ce-commitSkill
- ce-compound-refreshSkill
- ce-compoundSkill
- ce-debugSkill
- ce-doc-reviewSkill
- ce-dogfoodSkill
- ce-explainSkill
- ce-handoffSkill
- ce-ideateSkill
- ce-noslopSkill
- ce-optimizeSkill
- ce-polishSkill
- ce-povSkill
- ce-product-pulseSkill
- ce-promoteSkill
- ce-proofSkill
- ce-prototypeSkill
- ce-resolve-pr-feedbackSkill
- ce-retuneSkill
- ce-riffrec-feedback-analysisSkill
- ce-setupSkill
- ce-simplify-codeSkill
- ce-strategySkill
- ce-sweepSkill
- ce-test-browserSkill
- ce-test-xcodeSkill
- ce-workSkill
- ce-worktreeSkill
- lfgSkill
- wtfSkill
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

