agentleFS
gregwebsgregwebs/skills-sdlc/skills/implementation-plan/SKILL.md

implementation-plan

Skill20 starsChanged 44 days agoMITView on GitHub

Create a detailed Implementation Plan for a ticket or spec, corresponding to a single Pull Request.

24 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use architecture-review, code-quality and 1 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.
  • SentrySkill

    architecture-review

    Staff-level codebase health review. Finds monolithic modules, silent failures, type safety gaps, test coverage holes, and LLM-friendliness issues.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    code-quality

    Statically check changed C# against the same deterministic rules github-code-quality[bot] runs on pull requests, so a contributor can fix likely findings before opening the PR and keep the bot's inline comments to a minimum. Activate when a contributor asks to "check code quality", "run code quality on my changes", "will the code quality bot complain", "pre-check before I open the PR", "code quality check", or similar. Scoped to C#. Reads the diff and compares it against the enumerated csharp-code-quality rule set below — no CodeQL download or build required. This is a fast approximation of a dataflow engine, not a reproduction; report accordingly. Does NOT apply fixes unless explicitly asked.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • 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

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

11 rules. 0 are common, 9 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 22 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 9

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Create a detailed Implementation Plan for one work item.

    line 18
  2. Very specific:

    Use a user-supplied path or ticket first.

    line 23
  3. Distinctive:

    If a ticket links to other related documentation or pull requests, fetch them as well if you have access.

    line 26
  4. Distinctive:

    If there is a parent issue or related issues that are completed, look at those completed issues.

    line 27
  5. Distinctive:

    If it does not, stop and explain the desired split to the user.

    line 38
  6. Distinctive:

    Create diagrams or tables and examples for:

    line 55
  7. Distinctive:

    before/after panels for changed behavior.

    line 58
  8. Distinctive:

    All type changes at testing seams

    line 68
  9. Distinctive:

    If explicitly requested to edit files, show the details by actually making the edits and generating diffs.

    line 78
  10. Distinctive:

    If the change is trivial, no independent review is needed.

    line 91
  11. Very specific:

    Ensure that we are developing deep modules as described in the /codebase-design skill.

    line 99

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 22 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

Overview

Create a detailed Implementation Plan for one work item. Also produce a requirements specification.

Identify the specification

Use a user-supplied path or ticket first; then an accessible referenced issue; then a matching tracked spec; then conversation context. If none exists, suggest /grill-with-docs or /to-spec before planning. If a ticket links to other related documentation or pull requests, fetch them as well if you have access. If there is a parent issue or related issues that are completed, look at those completed issues. You can do this by looking at the commit history if the commit documents the issue.

Identify the standards sources

Discover applicable tracked standards documents. CONTEXT.md, ADRs, and conventional filenames are useful when present, but are not prerequisites.

Scope management

Decide whether the work plausibly fits one pull request. You can use the skill /breakdown as a guide, but do not to invoke it from inside planning. If it does not, stop and explain the desired split to the user.

What to include

The plan must give an implementer enough detail to execute without redesign.

A specification section with:

  • goals (including important non-goals)
  • requirements and acceptance criteria

High-level details:

  1. Background — Explain only the system needed for the change. Start with an optional beginner-friendly mental model, then narrow to the exact components, contracts, and prior behavior involved.
  2. Intuition — Explain the core idea before implementation detail. Use small concrete toy inputs and outputs with diagrams and examples where apropriate. Show the old and new behavior when comparison makes the change clearer.

Include the assumptions, and relevant standards constraints. Explain relevant failure modes and how to handle them.

Create diagrams or tables and examples for:

  • important state transitions
  • flow diagrams for requests, data, or control flow;
  • before/after panels for changed behavior;
  • labeled component cards for system boundaries and connections;
  • compact tables for mappings, invariants, and toy data.

Convert user stories into concrete tests or manual verification criteria.

Include a task checklist

Implementation details

  • All type changes at testing seams
  • Detailed file-level type and function signature changes
  • Implementation snippets for important non-obvious ideas
  • Documentation updates
  • Verifications (tests) using the /verify skill
    • High value and high defect areas
    • Important verifications to perform

By default, don't edit files. Include precise file and line references when available.

If explicitly requested to edit files, show the details by actually making the edits and generating diffs. Edits should compile. You may need to write stub code inside a function to satisfy type checking: use either a standard for "unimplemented" or a TODO comment so the incompletion is obvious.

Explain the changes in conceptual groups, ordered by execution or dependency flow rather than arbitrary file or diff order. Where possible, break up the implementation plan into separate phases.

Review

Include a Review notes section in the plan. Put the text "no independent review" in this section when the plan is written out and not yet independently reviewed.

Perform a self-review according to the Review criteria.

If the change is trivial, no independent review is needed. Put the text "trivial change: independent review not needed" in the review section.

Review criteria

Review in this order and incorporate the findings into the plan:

  1. Spec — completeness and scope.
  2. Architecture
    • Ensure that we are developing deep modules as described in the /codebase-design skill.
    • Can we make the change touch fewer files or otherwise be less invasive?
    • Use relevant ADRs
  3. Quality — standards, tests, and operational risks.

Present the revised plan as the reviewable output.

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.