planning-and-task-breakdown
Skill17 starsChanged 23 days agoMITView on GitHub
Breaks work into ordered, parallel-dispatchable tasks with an execution DAG. Output format is consumable by CI matrices and parallel agent runners — each task has a stable ID, declared file writes, conflict edges, and branch suffix. Use when you have a spec, brief, or shaper output and need to decompose it into implementable units. Use when a task feels too large, when scope spans multi-repo or multi-week work, or when parallel execution across multiple agents is on the table.
77 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- ishandutta2007/Awesome-Agent-Skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- MMACABRE/SKILLStheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- anotherben/claude-harnesstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- steven123397/nexuskit-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- AgnesAI-Labs/agnet-skills-cntheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- yuusakuri/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use constraint-driven-development, deprecation-and-migration and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
MrCipherSmithSkillconstraint-driven-development
Use when a project needs a persistent, measurable quality bar — starting a project without documented standards, 'set up constraints', or when coverage/perf/a11y thresholds get re-debated per-PR. Produces CONSTRAINTS.md with enforceable numbers, ratchets, and a guard against silent weakening. NOT for throwaway prototypes or a one-off CI setup.
Also in 14 projects that use this
HK-hubSkilldeprecation-and-migration
Manages deprecation and migration. Use when removing old systems, APIs, or features. Use when migrating users from one implementation to another. Use when deciding whether to maintain or sunset existing code.
Also in 34 projects that use this
HK-hubSkillobservability-and-instrumentation
Instruments code so production behavior is visible and diagnosable. Use when adding logging, metrics, tracing, or alerting. Use when shipping any feature that runs in production and you need evidence it works. Use when production issues are reported but you can't tell what happened from the available data.
Also in 26 projects that use this
seikaikyoSkilldoubt-driven-development
對非平凡決策啟動新鮮 context 對抗審查(找碴不背書),在修正還便宜的時候抓出錯誤方向。適用:高風險改動(production、資安敏感邏輯、不可逆操作)、不熟的程式碼、要宣稱「這樣是安全的 / 可行的」之前。機械性操作與一行修改不適用。
Also in 30 projects that use this
seikaikyoSkillinterview-me
需求不明時的意圖萃取訪談:一次一題、每題附上自己的猜測、聽出「真正想要 vs 覺得應該要」,直到能預測使用者反應(約 95% 信心)才動工。適用:需求缺少對象 / 動機 / 成功標準 / 約束,或使用者點名「訪談我」「先確認一下」「我們確定嗎」。明確自足的指示、純資訊查詢、機械性操作不適用。
Also in 31 projects that use this
GSA-TTSSkillarchitecture-decision-records
Load when a user wants architecture decision records (ADRs) drafted from requirements or a design discussion, asks which decisions need an ADR, or wants an ADR draft reviewed for one-sided trade-offs, weak alternatives or missing requirement links. Not for setting up a project's whole documentation system (project-documentation-system).
Also in 3 projects that use this
- +2 more from HK-hub
Other versions77 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 77
- addyosmani/agent-skills★ 114ksame name
- ollaya-dev/ollaya★ 1.4ksame name
- shashankswe2020-ux/whoop-mcp★ 174same name
- tranhieutt/software_development_department★ 71same name
- larchanka/skills★ 50same name
- vinvcn/addyosmani-agent-skills-zh★ 46same name
- jmxt3/gitscape.ai★ 33same name
- sampleXbro/agentsmesh★ 27same name
- jaskirat1616/grok-skills★ 22same name
- ishandutta2007/Awesome-Agent-Skills★ 21same name
67 more not listed
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 repository38 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- adversarial-claims-reviewerSkill
- autoresearchSkill
- browser-testing-with-devtoolsSkill
- codebase-cost-estimatorSkill
- code-review-and-qualitySkill
- content-opsSkill
- content-pipelineSkill
- conversion-opsSkill
- data-model-documentationSkill
- data-model-verificationSkill
- deployment-pipelinesSkill
- findings-ledgerSkill
- game-balancerSkill
- game-systems-designerSkill
- godot-engineerSkill
- growth-engineSkill
- iap-managerSkill
- library-investigatorSkill
- marketing-shaperSkill
- memory-extractionSkill
- outbound-engineSkill
- phaser-engineerSkill
- prompt-shaperSkill
- release-managerSkill
- revenue-intelligenceSkill
- rust-engineerSkill
- security-engineeringSkill
- securitySkill
- seo-opsSkill
- session-stateSkill
- skill-library-reviewSkill
- telemetrySkill
- typescript-analyticsSkill
- typescript-data-engineeringSkill
- typescript-testing-backendSkill
- typescript-testing-frontendSkill
- web3-smart-contract-engineeringSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. 1 is common, 4 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
1
Common
Most of the 70 edited versions we read keep these.
4
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 17
After a /shape brief covering multi-repo, multi-week, or multi-slice work
- Distinctive: line 18
When a spec or task feels too large to start in one session
- Distinctive: line 19
When work needs to parallelize across agents or sessions
- Distinctive: line 20
When implementation order isn't obvious
- Distinctive: line 26
Plan mode: Read in read-only mode. Map dependencies, note risks.
- Very specific: line 35
Stable IDs, never renumbered: Use content-based slugs (T-auth-schema).
- Common: line 53
Before starting implementation, confirm:
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 70 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
Planning and Task Breakdown
Decompose work into small, verifiable tasks with a parallel-dispatchable structure. The output is a plan document — never code — that downstream runners (CI matrices, single-agent execution sessions) consume to do the work.
When to use
- After a
/shapebrief covering multi-repo, multi-week, or multi-slice work - When a spec or task feels too large to start in one session
- When work needs to parallelize across agents or sessions
- When implementation order isn't obvious
When not to use. Single-file changes with obvious scope, or specs that already contain well-defined tasks.
The planning process
- Plan mode. Read in read-only mode. Map dependencies, note risks. Do not write code during planning.
- Identify the dependency graph. Bottom-up — foundations first.
- Slice vertically. Each task is a feature path through every layer it needs (schema + API + UI), not a horizontal layer of the system. Horizontal slicing produces half-finished branches.
- Write task blocks. Each task is YAML frontmatter (id, depends_on, parallel_safe, conflicts_with, files_write, files_read, branch_suffix, scope) plus prose (description, acceptance, verification). Format and field semantics:
references/task-block-format.md. - Order and checkpoint. Phases are presentational; the DAG is the execution order. Checkpoints are synchronization barriers — dispatch pauses until they clear.
- Declare the Execution DAG. Top-of-document summary of edges using
→and||. Format and dispatcher contract:references/execution-dag.md.
Universal rules
- Stable IDs, never renumbered. Use content-based slugs (
T-auth-schema). Renumbering breaks every reference. Retire dropped IDs rather than reusing them. files_writeis authoritative, not advisory. The dispatcher uses it for conflict detection. Under-declare → parallel collisions; over-declare → false serialization.- The DAG is a summary, not the source of truth. Per-task
depends_onis authoritative. The verification checklist enforces that they agree. - Day-zero ready set must be non-empty. At least one task has
depends_on: []. If none do, the plan is malformed. scope: Lmust be split before dispatch. Agents perform best on XS / S / M.- Plan, do not implement. This skill never writes code. The output is a plan document; execution is a separate step.
- Every plan carries a
**Status:**line. Lifecycleproposed→in-progress→shipped|superseded. A fresh plan starts atproposed; keep it current as the work moves. It is the signal for retiring completed plans (pruneshipped/supersededplans manually), so an unmarked plan never gets recognized as done. Seeassets/plan-document-template.md.
References
references/task-block-format.md— per-task YAML frontmatter and prose structure, field-by-field semanticsreferences/execution-dag.md— DAG syntax, dispatcher contract, checkpoints, worked exampleassets/plan-document-template.md— full document templatereferences/parallelization-decisions.md— when to set each YAML field; contract-first, barrel-file, migration patternsreferences/task-sizing-and-redflags.md— sizing table, when to split, common rationalizations, red flags
Verification
Before starting implementation, confirm:
- The plan has a
**Status:**line (a fresh plan starts atproposed) - Every task has a stable
id(content-based slug, not a number) - Every task has acceptance criteria and a verification step
- Every task declares
depends_on,parallel_safe,files_write - Every pair of tasks whose
files_writeoverlap is in each other'sconflicts_with - At least one task has
depends_on: [](a non-empty day-zero ready set) - No task is
scope: L(split it before dispatch) - No task touches more than ~5 files
- The Execution DAG matches the per-task
depends_on(no orphan IDs, no missing edges) - Checkpoints exist between major phases and are referenced in the DAG
- The human has reviewed and approved the plan
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.

