planning-and-task-breakdown
Skill0 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Breaks work into ordered tasks. Use when you have a spec or clear requirements and need to break work into implementable tasks. Use when a task feels too large to start, when you need to estimate scope, or when parallel work is possible.
77 other projects use a version of this, 51 of them edited; 2 new projects in the last 4 weeks, against 1 the 4 before.
Adopted by
Rising: 2 new projects took it in the last 4 weeks, 2× the 4 weeks before.thin data
Most recently taken up by
- ishandutta2007/Awesome-Agent-Skillsedited, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- MMACABRE/SKILLSword for word, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- anotherben/claude-harnessedited, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- steven123397/nexuskit-skillsedited, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- AgnesAI-Labs/agnet-skills-cnedited, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- yuusakuri/agent-skillsedited, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use architecture-decision-records, verification-before-completion 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.
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
OpenAISkillverification-before-completion
Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
Also in 7 projects that use this
AnasX7Skillminimalist-ui
Clean editorial-style interfaces. Warm monochrome palette, typographic contrast, flat bento grids, muted pastels. No gradients, no heavy shadows.
Also in 3 projects that use this
delphi-aiSkillanimate
Animation patterns and best practices for Next.js/React applications. Use this skill when implementing animations, transitions, hover effects, page transitions, modals, or any motion in React components. Based on Emil Kowalski's "Animations on the Web" course.
Also in 3 projects that use this
VercelSkillweb-design-guidelines
Review UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance. Use when asked to "review my UI", "check accessibility", "audit design", "review UX", or "check my site against best practices".
Also in 6 projects that use this
Other versions77 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 9
- addyosmani/agent-skills★ 114k100% same
- jaskirat1616/grok-skills★ 22100% same
- Marvellbrazil/my-agentic-skills★ 4100% same
- MMACABRE/SKILLS★ 1100% same
- SanHsien/agent-skills★ 1100% same
- AI-Degen-69/issue-to-pr-skills★ 0100% same
- Assist-phung-van-dung/claude-skills★ 0100% same
- elvladislavo/claude-skills★ 0100% same
- kitloomlk-stack/spec-driven-planning-kit★ 0100% same
Edited · 51
- ollaya-dev/ollaya★ 1.4k100% same
- shashankswe2020-ux/whoop-mcp★ 17495% same
- larchanka/skills★ 5079% same
- vinvcn/addyosmani-agent-skills-zh★ 4636% same
- jmxt3/gitscape.ai★ 3389% same
- sampleXbro/agentsmesh★ 2795% same
- ishandutta2007/Awesome-Agent-Skills★ 2195% same
- anotherben/claude-harness★ 747% same
- HK-hub/AgentSkills★ 694% same
- lza6/claw-code-tingfeng★ 595% same
41 more not listed
Wrote their own version · 17
- tranhieutt/software_development_department★ 71same name
- LazyIsEfficient/agentic-os★ 17same name
- moberghr/mtk-agent-toolkit★ 9same name
- momentmaker/kaijutsu★ 3same name
- allanbian1017/skills★ 2same name
- bnalwalid/walidforge-skills★ 2same name
- codexskills/agent-forge★ 2same name
- Aleksandr-Litvinenko/agent-skills-ru★ 1same name
- buildpad-ai/skills★ 1same name
- charliesbot/skills★ 1same name
7 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 repository30 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- api-and-interface-designSkill
- brainstormingSkill
- browser-testing-with-devtoolsSkill
- ci-cd-and-automationSkill
- code-review-and-qualitySkill
- code-simplificationSkill
- constraint-driven-developmentSkill
- context-engineeringSkill
- database-schema-designerSkill
- debugging-and-error-recoverySkill
- deprecation-and-migrationSkill
- documentation-and-adrsSkill
- doubt-driven-developmentSkill
- frontend-ui-engineeringSkill
- git-workflow-and-versioningSkill
- idea-refineSkill
- improve-codebase-architectureSkill
- incremental-implementationSkill
- interview-meSkill
- observability-and-instrumentationSkill
- performance-optimizationSkill
- security-and-hardeningSkill
- shipping-and-launchSkill
- source-driven-developmentSkill
- spec-driven-developmentSkill
- test-driven-developmentSkill
- using-agent-skillsSkill
- webapp-testingSkill
- write-feature-docsSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
13 rules. 9 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
9
Common
Most of the 61 edited versions we read keep these.
2
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
- Common: line 26
Before writing any code, operate in read-only mode:
- Common: line 28
Read the spec and relevant codebase sections
- Common: line 59
Instead of building all the database, then all the API, then all the UI — build one complete feature path at a time:
- Distinctive: line 115
Add explicit checkpoints to the task list target:
- Common: line 135
If a task is L or larger, it should be broken into smaller tasks.
- Very specific: line 148
Create the tasks/ directory if it does not exist.
- Very specific: line 150
Never overwrite an incomplete plan: Before writing tasks/plan.md or tasks/todo.md, check whether they already exist and still contain …
- Distinctive: line 211
When tasks live in an external tracker, keep the Task List section above as an ordered index of tracker item IDs or links instead of a …
- Common: line 215
When multiple agents or sessions are available:
- Common: line 237
No verification steps in the plan
- Common: line 238
All tasks are XL-sized
- Common: line 239
No checkpoints between tasks
- Common: line 244
Before starting implementation, confirm:
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 61 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
Overview
Decompose work into small, verifiable tasks with explicit acceptance criteria. Good task breakdown is the difference between an agent that completes work reliably and one that produces a tangled mess. Every task should be small enough to implement, test, and verify in a single focused session.
When to Use
- You have a spec and need to break it into implementable units
- A task feels too large or vague to start
- Work needs to be parallelized across multiple agents or sessions
- You need to communicate scope to a human
- The implementation order isn't obvious
When NOT to use: Single-file changes with obvious scope, or when the spec already contains well-defined tasks.
The Planning Process
Step 1: Enter Plan Mode
Before writing any code, operate in read-only mode:
- Read the spec and relevant codebase sections
- Identify existing patterns and conventions
- Map dependencies between components
- Note risks and unknowns
Do NOT write code during planning. The output is a plan document saved to tasks/plan.md and a task list recorded in the task list target (see Output Files; default tasks/todo.md), not implementation.
Step 2: Identify the Dependency Graph
Map what depends on what:
Database schema
│
├── API models/types
│ │
│ ├── API endpoints
│ │ │
│ │ └── Frontend API client
│ │ │
│ │ └── UI components
│ │
│ └── Validation logic
│
└── Seed data / migrationsImplementation order follows the dependency graph bottom-up: build foundations first.
Step 3: Slice Vertically
Instead of building all the database, then all the API, then all the UI — build one complete feature path at a time:
Bad (horizontal slicing):
Task 1: Build entire database schema
Task 2: Build all API endpoints
Task 3: Build all UI components
Task 4: Connect everythingGood (vertical slicing):
Task 1: User can create an account (schema + API + UI for registration)
Task 2: User can log in (auth schema + API + UI for login)
Task 3: User can create a task (task schema + API + UI for creation)
Task 4: User can view task list (query + API + UI for list view)Each vertical slice delivers working, testable functionality.
Step 4: Write Tasks
Each task follows this structure, whether it lands in the markdown task list or as an item in an external tracker (see Output Files):
## Task [N]: [Short descriptive title]
**Description:** One paragraph explaining what this task accomplishes.
**Acceptance criteria:**
- [ ] [Specific, testable condition]
- [ ] [Specific, testable condition]
**Verification:**
- [ ] Tests pass: [the repository's focused-test command]
- [ ] Build succeeds: [the repository's build command]
- [ ] Manual check: [description of what to verify]
**Dependencies:** [Task numbers this depends on, or "None"]
**Files likely touched:**
- `src/path/to/file.ts`
- `tests/path/to/test.ts`
**Estimated scope:** [Small: 1-2 files | Medium: 3-5 files | Large: 5+ files]Step 5: Order and Checkpoint
Arrange tasks so that:
- Dependencies are satisfied (build foundation first)
- Each task leaves the system in a working state
- Verification checkpoints occur after every 2-3 tasks
- High-risk tasks are early (fail fast)
Add explicit checkpoints to the task list target:
## Checkpoint: After Tasks 1-3
- [ ] All tests pass
- [ ] Application builds without errors
- [ ] Core user flow works end-to-end
- [ ] Review with human before proceedingTask Sizing Guidelines
| Size | Files | Scope | Example |
| XS | 1 | Single function or config change | Add a validation rule |
| S | 1-2 | One component or endpoint | Add a new API endpoint |
| M | 3-5 | One feature slice | User registration flow |
| L | 5-8 | Multi-component feature | Search with filtering and pagination |
| XL | 8+ | Too large — break it down further | — |
If a task is L or larger, it should be broken into smaller tasks. An agent performs best on S and M tasks.
When to break a task down further:
- It would take more than one focused session (roughly 2+ hours of agent work)
- You cannot describe the acceptance criteria in 3 or fewer bullet points
- It touches two or more independent subsystems (e.g., auth and billing)
- You find yourself writing "and" in the task title (a sign it is two tasks)
Output Files
- Plan document: Save the implementation plan to
tasks/plan.md. This is always a markdown file — design decisions, risks, and open questions don't map cleanly onto individual tracker issues. - Task list: Record each task in the task list target (defined below).
Create the tasks/ directory if it does not exist.
Never overwrite an incomplete plan. Before writing tasks/plan.md or tasks/todo.md, check whether they already exist and still contain unchecked tasks:
- Same work being replanned (the user asked to revise or extend this plan) → update the existing files in place.
- Different work → stop and ask. The unchecked tasks may be mid-build in another session. Do not delete, overwrite, or rename the existing files on your own; present the conflict and let the user decide (finish the old plan first, explicitly discard it, or tell you where the new plan should go).
The same rule applies to an external task list target: never bulk-close or delete another plan's open tracker items to make room for new ones.
Task List Target
The task list target is where tasks and checkpoints are recorded. It is defined once, here; every other reference in this skill defers to it.
- Default: a checklist-style markdown file at
tasks/todo.md. This is the convention the/buildcommand and other downstream tooling expect. Use it unless the project says otherwise. - External tracker: if the project's agent rules (
CLAUDE.md,AGENTS.md, etc.) or the user designate an issue tracker (e.g. GitHub Issues, Jira, Linear,bd/beads), create one tracker item per task instead of writingtasks/todo.md. Map the Step 4 structure onto the tracker's fields: acceptance criteria and verification steps in the item body, dependencies via the tracker's linking mechanism (bd dep add, "blocked by", etc.). Record Step 5 checkpoints as tracker items too, or as a checklist in the plan document if the tracker has no natural equivalent.
When using an external tracker, note it in tasks/plan.md (e.g. "Tasks tracked in Linear project FOO") so downstream steps and future sessions know where to look, and keep the plan document's Task List section as an ordered index of tracker item IDs or links rather than a duplicate checklist.
Plan Document Template
# Implementation Plan: [Feature/Project Name]
## Overview
[One paragraph summary of what we're building]
## Architecture Decisions
- [Key decision 1 and rationale]
- [Key decision 2 and rationale]
## Task List
### Phase 1: Foundation
- [ ] Task 1: ...
- [ ] Task 2: ...
### Checkpoint: Foundation
- [ ] Tests pass, builds clean
### Phase 2: Core Features
- [ ] Task 3: ...
- [ ] Task 4: ...
### Checkpoint: Core Features
- [ ] End-to-end flow works
### Phase 3: Polish
- [ ] Task 5: ...
- [ ] Task 6: ...
### Checkpoint: Complete
- [ ] All acceptance criteria met
- [ ] Ready for review
## Risks and Mitigations
| Risk | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|--------|------------|
| [Risk] | [High/Med/Low] | [Strategy] |
## Open Questions
- [Question needing human input]When tasks live in an external tracker, keep the Task List section above as an ordered index of tracker item IDs or links instead of a duplicate checklist.
Parallelization Opportunities
When multiple agents or sessions are available:
- Safe to parallelize: Independent feature slices, tests for already-implemented features, documentation
- Must be sequential: Database migrations, shared state changes, dependency chains
- Needs coordination: Features that share an API contract (define the contract first, then parallelize)
Common Rationalizations
| Rationalization | Reality |
| "I'll figure it out as I go" | That's how you end up with a tangled mess and rework. 10 minutes of planning saves hours. |
| "The tasks are obvious" | Write them down anyway. Explicit tasks surface hidden dependencies and forgotten edge cases. |
| "Planning is overhead" | Planning is the task. Implementation without a plan is just typing. |
| "I can hold it all in my head" | Context windows are finite. Written plans survive session boundaries and compaction. |
"The old tasks/plan.md is stale, I'll just replace it" | Unchecked tasks may be mid-build in another session. Overwriting them destroys work state that exists nowhere else. Stop and ask. |
Red Flags
- Starting implementation without a written task list
- Overwriting a
tasks/plan.mdortasks/todo.mdthat still has unchecked tasks for different work, without asking - Writing
tasks/todo.mdwhen the project has designated an external tracker (or scattering tasks across both) - Tasks that say "implement the feature" without acceptance criteria
- No verification steps in the plan
- All tasks are XL-sized
- No checkpoints between tasks
- Dependency order isn't considered
Verification
Before starting implementation, confirm:
- Every task has acceptance criteria
- Every task has a verification step
- Task dependencies are identified and ordered correctly
- Tasks are recorded in the task list target (default
tasks/todo.md) - No pre-existing incomplete plan was overwritten without explicit user confirmation
- No task touches more than ~5 files
- Checkpoints exist between major phases
- The human has reviewed and approved the plan
See Also
Acceptance criteria are per-task and answer "did we build the right thing?". They sit on top of the project-wide Definition of Done, the standing bar every task clears before it counts as done. See ../../references/definition-of-done.md.
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.

