plan-feature
Skill1 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Produce a phased implementation plan for a feature, refactor, or multi-step change — dependencies, risks, files to touch, and how it will be verified. Use before writing code for anything non-trivial.
30 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- NemesLaszlo/claude-code-harnesstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- NemesLaszlo/Agent-Collectiontheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- olimstv/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- aberson/skill-meshtheir own version, first seen Oct 24, 2026
- alexisselorm/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
- nowsprinting/unity-coding-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 16, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use explore, review and 3 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.
genomewalkerSkillexplore
RLM-style recursive memory exploration - dynamically navigate the memory graph
Also in 3 projects that use this
SentrySkillreview
Fixture review skill.
Also in 5 projects that use this
DockerSkillreview-pr
Review one or more incoming Docker documentation pull requests as a maintainer. Independently validate technical claims, assess editorial fit and information architecture, choose a verdict, and draft exact inline or PR-wide feedback behind a confirmation gate. Use for requests such as "review PR 123", "is this PR correct?", "does this information belong here?", "validate this PR", or "help review backlog PRs". Do not use to maintain or fix a PR you own; use maintain-pr for that.
Also in 3 projects that use this
OpenAISkillsystematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes
Also in 3 projects that use this
GoogleSkillcode-review
Adversarial systems, concurrency, memory-model, and architecture code review protocol. Use this skill whenever asked to review code, PRs, diffs, or branches in Filament.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions30 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 30
- Aurealibe/claude-config★ 68same name
- smartwhale8/claude-playbook★ 40same name
- uniffy-io/uniffy★ 26same name
- nowsprinting/unity-coding-skills★ 20same name
- asta-nguyen/kamehadb★ 14same name
- Karthick-Ramachandran/persist-os★ 9same name
- MooseDesign1/DDD-DesignDrivenDevelopment★ 9same name
- mnzralee/claude-multi-agent-architecture★ 8same name
- iopsystems/skills-mcp★ 6same name
- lautioliver/barrilete-kit★ 6same name
20 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 repository14 other files it gives its agents.
- .claude/rules/common/agents.mdAGENTS.md
- docs/agents.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- standards-<layer>Skill
- add-agentSkill
- add-standards-layerSkill
- audit-configSkill
- research-reuseSkill
- review-changesSkill
- shipSkill
- standards-fastapiSkill
- standards-pythonSkill
- standards-typescriptSkill
- tddSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 29 edited versions we read keep these.
2
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
- Distinctive: line 20
Research and reuse first: Before proposing anything new, search the codebase for existing functions, utilities, and patterns to reuse, and …
- Distinctive: line 32
Respect the working tree above: If there are uncommitted changes, account for them instead of planning as though the branch were clean.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 29 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
Repository state
- Branch and working tree: !
git status --short --branch - Recent commits: !
git log --oneline -10
Task
Plan the implementation of: $ARGUMENTS
You produce a plan. You do not write implementation code.
- Research and reuse first. Before proposing anything new, search the codebase for existing functions, utilities, and patterns to reuse, and check whether a library already solves the problem. Prefer adopting a proven approach over net-new code.
- Understand the request and the affected code paths. Trace the relevant files and name them.
- Break the work into phases with clear, ordered steps. Identify dependencies, risks, and anything that needs a decision from the user.
- Define done: what tests prove the change works, and how to verify it end to end.
Two constraints on how you write it:
- Name the critical files each phase touches. For a pattern repeated across many files, describe the pattern once and list a few representative paths — do not enumerate everything.
- Respect the working tree above. If there are uncommitted changes, account for them instead of planning as though the branch were clean.
Output
- Context — why this change, what the intended outcome is.
- Phases — ordered steps with dependencies. Each phase names the files to touch and the existing utilities to reuse.
- Risks and open questions — anything that needs a human decision before implementation starts.
- Definition of done — the tests that prove it works, plus the manual end-to-end check.
Recommend one approach. Do not survey alternatives you would not pick.
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.

