plan-first
Skill39 starsChanged 17 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use for any coding task with more than about three steps or touching more than one file — new features, refactors, migrations, multi-file changes, or vague requests like "build X" or "add Y to the app". Read the code, write a short plan, then execute step by step with checks.
11 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- cathyzhang0905/agent-cockpittheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- fvkmizel/soulkeeperedited, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- AndrewBrown-USDA/aigb-skills-usdatheir own version, first seen Oct 31, 2026
- randommonicle/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- nadavnaveh/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- hongshuxifan321/plan-firsttheir own version, first seen Oct 21, 2026
Other versions11 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- fvkmizel/soulkeeper★ 075% same
Wrote their own version · 10
- duncan-buildroom/freeskills★ 65same name
- hongshuxifan321/plan-first★ 43same name
- randommonicle/claude-skills★ 27same name
- AndrewBrown-USDA/aigb-skills-usda★ 7same name
- dfedoryshchev/weftworks★ 5same name
- nadavnaveh/skills★ 2same name
- cathyzhang0905/agent-cockpit★ 0same name
- justomsharma/github-resume-assistant★ 0same name
- kartykk/agent-ready★ 0same name
- ProjectWaja/claude-skillcraft★ 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 repository4 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- no-invented-codeSkill
- systematic-debuggingSkill
- verify-before-doneSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 8 edited versions we read keep these.
6
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 12
Read the files you will touch and one or two similar existing features.
- Distinctive: line 16
If a choice changes the result and cannot be inferred from the code (e.g.
- Distinctive: line 30
Do step N → run its check → only then move to step N+1.
- Distinctive: line 31
If a check fails, fix it before continuing.
- Distinctive: line 32
If you discover the plan is wrong, stop, update the plan, and say what changed.
- Distinctive: line 35
Do not refactor, rename, or "improve" code the task did not ask for.
- Very specific: line 39
Run the full verification (see the verify-before-done skill).
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 8 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
Plan First
Long tasks fail when you start editing before you understand the code. Plan briefly, then execute.
1. Load context (before writing any code)
mem_context, thenmem_searchwith the feature/module name — reuse past decisions and known pitfalls.- Read the files you will touch and one or two similar existing features. Copy their patterns.
- Identify: entry point, data flow, where tests live, how the project is run.
2. Clarify only what blocks you
If a choice changes the result and cannot be inferred from the code (e.g. which database, breaking an API), ask one short question. Otherwise pick the option most consistent with the codebase and state it.
3. Write the plan (keep it short)
Goal: <one sentence>
Steps:
1. <small, verifiable change> — check: <how you will know it worked>
2. ...
Risks: <what could break>Each step should be small enough to verify on its own. Prefer 3–7 steps.
4. Execute one step at a time
- Do step N → run its check → only then move to step N+1.
- If a check fails, fix it before continuing. Do not pile new changes on a broken state.
- If you discover the plan is wrong, stop, update the plan, and say what changed.
5. Stay in scope
- Do not refactor, rename, or "improve" code the task did not ask for.
- Match the existing style, naming, and libraries. Do not add a dependency if the project already has one that does the job.
6. Finish
- Run the full verification (see the
verify-before-doneskill). - Save architecture/design decisions with
mem_save(What / Why / Where / Lesson). - Report: what was done, what was verified, what is left.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
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.

