agentleFS
antonioneto11antonioneto11/agent-dev-framework/skills/build-plan/SKILL.md

agent-build-plan

Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Turn the specs into a sequenced, scoped build plan for an AI agent product — milestones, the smallest shippable MVP, and what to build in what order. Use whenever the user wants to plan the actual build, sequence the work, decide what goes in the MVP vs. later, break a spec into tasks, or figure out where to start coding. Trigger on "build plan", "what do I build first", "sequence the work", "MVP scope", "break this into tasks", "roadmap", even without those exact words. This is the build-plan step of the agent-dev-framework pipeline.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈2

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Follow _conventions.md (read-first order, docs/ vs artifacts/, don't-clobber guard).

    line 13
  2. Very specific:

    Read PROJECT.md and all prior artifacts: prd.md, system-design.md, tech-spec.md, data-model.md, monitoring.md, and the eval set.

    line 16
  3. Distinctive:

    De-risk first: If feasibility of the core agent task isn't already proven (prototype), that's task one — prove it before building …

    line 27
  4. Very specific:

    Write artifacts/build-plan.md (apply the don't-clobber guard):

    line 37
  5. Distinctive:

    Keep it realistic for one person.

    line 57

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “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

Agent Build Plan

The final step: turn everything upstream into an ordered plan a solo founder can actually execute. The discipline here is ruthless scoping — the plan's job is to get to the smallest thing a real user can use, with the agent's eval/trace backbone in place, and nothing more.

Conventions

Follow _conventions.md (read-first order, docs/ vs artifacts/, don't-clobber guard).

Before you start

Read PROJECT.md and all prior artifacts: prd.md, system-design.md, tech-spec.md, data-model.md, monitoring.md, and the eval set. The deliberately-not-building lists from the tech spec and system design are your scoping guide — respect them.

The MVP gate (apply this hard)

An agent prototype becomes an MVP only when it has traces and a starter eval set. So the build plan must sequence those early, not last. A plan that ships agent features to users before observability and evals exist is sequenced wrong — fix it.

How to sequence

Order by risk and dependency, not by what's easy:

  1. De-risk first. If feasibility of the core agent task isn't already proven (prototype), that's task one — prove it before building scaffolding around it.
  2. Backbone early. Tracing + a minimal eval harness come before feature breadth, because everything after is safer when you can measure it.
  3. Thin vertical slice. One complete path through the product end to end, for one real use case, before widening.
  4. Then widen to the rest of the MVP scope.
  5. Defer everything on the not-building lists explicitly.

Output

Write artifacts/build-plan.md (apply the don't-clobber guard):

# Build plan — [product]
## MVP definition (the smallest thing a real user can use)
## Sequenced milestones
For each: goal · what's in · what's explicitly deferred · how you'll know it's done
(tie "done" to eval pass-rate or a concrete check, not vibes)
## Prototype status
Is core-task feasibility proven? If not, that's milestone 0.
## Observability & eval backbone
Where in the sequence traces + starter evals land (must be early).
## Explicitly deferred past MVP
## Biggest execution risk & how the plan mitigates it

Principles

  • Each milestone should be independently shippable or at least demoable.
  • Tie "done" to the eval set where possible — for an agent, "done" means "passes these cases," which is more honest than "looks finished."
  • Keep it realistic for one person. If the plan needs a team, say so and suggest what to cut.

End by stating the single first task the user should start on Monday morning, concretely.

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.