agentleFS
anotbanotb/management-consulting-plugin/skills/implementation-planning/SKILL.md

implementation-planning

Skill62 starsChanged 11 days agoMITView on GitHub

Turn an agreed recommendation into a feasible roadmap and implementation plan. Use for sequencing, workstreams, dependencies, resources, rollout gates, recovery plans, and the business case needed to fund execution.

13 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use security-review and systematic-debugging.

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.
  • SentrySkill

    security-review

    Finds exploitable application security vulnerabilities in code changes. Use for Warden security scans, appsec review, OWASP-style checks, authentication or authorization bugs, injection, XSS, SSRF, path traversal, secrets, unsafe crypto, webhook verification, open redirects, or sensitive data exposure.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • OpenAISkill

    systematic-debugging

    Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 13 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use the supplied recommendation, constraints, milestones, resource availability, and baseline.

    line 15
  2. Distinctive:

    Use scheduling and resourcing for critical paths, effort, capacity, and recovery.

    line 27
  3. Distinctive:

    Use the client's existing governance where supplied.

    line 35

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 13 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Implementation Planning

Produce a plan that respects funding, capacity, dependencies, and the decision already made. Enter at the requested stage: compare execution approaches, secure funding, design a roadmap, detail workstreams, or recover a slipping plan. Do not repeat strategy or build a new business case when the direction and funding are already approved.

Use the supplied recommendation, constraints, milestones, resource availability, and baseline. Mark unknowns and proceed with supported portions. Ask only when a missing input prevents a useful or defensible plan. Label estimated durations, proposed owners, and unapproved dates explicitly; do not invent commitments.

Choose the feasible approach

Where execution choices are open, compare materially different approaches, including defer or continue current operations when relevant. Screen hard constraints before weighted preferences. A high score cannot compensate for missing legal eligibility, unaffordable peak funding, or unavailable capacity. Use weights only when they represent the decision-maker's priorities; test whether plausible changes alter the choice.

If funding analysis is requested, show incremental costs and benefits, timing, downside, and funding need against a consistent baseline. Distinguish released capacity from cash savings, and revenue from contribution. Use financial-modeling if available for substantial calculations; this workflow does not depend on that skill being installed. Do not invent a hurdle rate or add a standard contingency percentage to make a plan look complete.

Sequence the work

Define outcomes and acceptance criteria before assigning activities. Group workstreams by manageable responsibility and explicit interfaces. Map dependencies, required client decisions, vendor lead times, and business calendar constraints before committing dates.

Use scheduling and resourcing for critical paths, effort, capacity, and recovery. Distinguish target dates from feasible forecasts. Protect business continuity and account for parallel operations, training, adoption, support, and benefit measurement where relevant.

Choose rollout gates that release commitment as evidence improves. State the evidence needed, authority, and responses: proceed, proceed with bounded conditions, revise, or stop. These are gates for executing the plan, not prerequisites for drafting later phases. Provisional later phases can remain useful while earlier evidence is pending.

Assign ownership and control

Give each deliverable an accountable role and the people doing the work. In a RACI, normally assign one A and at least one R, with combined A/R allowed on small teams. Confirm how joint legal authorities or mandated approvals are represented without hiding them in a simplified matrix. Keep consulted roles limited to those whose input changes the work.

Use the client's existing governance where supplied. Set escalation by materiality, remaining decision time, and authority rather than generic two-week or 10% cutoffs. For ongoing reporting, project-governance can help when available. Separate consulting recommendations from client approval and spending authority.

Deliver and check

Present the outcome, sequence, workstreams, milestone evidence, dependencies, capacity, budget, risks, and immediate decision or action at the requested depth. A short roadmap does not require a full program handbook.

Verify dates follow dependencies, resource demand fits availability, budgets reconcile, and benefits have a measurement owner. Show the limiting constraint and the consequence of delay. For a recovery plan, distinguish the original baseline, current forecast, and proposed reset; do not erase slippage by silently replacing the baseline. State the trigger and fallback for the risks that could defeat the plan.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.