plan-feature
Skill1 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Produces a structured implementation plan for a feature, update, or bug fix after reading reference files. Operates in read-only Plan Mode — no files are written. Requires lead approval before implementation. Step 3 of the dev-workflow.
- Reads credentials
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 4 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
AWSSkillship
Finalize dev work on an issue branch — update docs, push, and open a PR.
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 repository12 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- create-prSkill
- delete-branchSkill
- dev-workflowSkill
- fix-planSkill
- implement-fixSkill
- implement-planSkill
- init-referencesSkill
- merge-mainSkill
- read-referencesSkill
- test-lintSkill
- update-referencesSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
11 rules. 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 29 edited versions we read keep these.
7
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 28
If reference context is missing, invoke /read-references first
- Distinctive: line 33
Read any file on disk
- Very specific: line 34
Run grep, find, cat to explore the codebase
- Distinctive: line 35
Ask the lead clarifying questions
- Distinctive: line 38
Write, edit, or delete any file
- Distinctive: line 39
Run migrations, artisan commands, or npm scripts
- Distinctive: line 58
If the task is ambiguous, ask ONE clarifying question and wait for the answer before proceeding.
- Very specific: line 117
Always include references/{relevant_map}.md as a MODIFY entry
- Distinctive: line 119
If a migration is needed, list it FIRST
- Very specific: line 120
Never include vendor/, node_modules/, .env files
- Distinctive: line 164
Do NOT proceed to implementation until the lead explicitly approves.
“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
Skill: /plan-feature
Usage
/plan-feature "{task_description}"Examples:
/plan-feature "add product filtering by category on the listing page"
/plan-feature "fix cart total not updating when quantity is changed"
/plan-feature "refactor order service to extract coupon logic"Prerequisites
/read-referencesmust have been executed in this session- If reference context is missing, invoke
/read-referencesfirst
Mode: READ-ONLY
In this step you MAY:
- Read any file on disk
- Run
grep,find,catto explore the codebase - Ask the lead clarifying questions
You MUST NOT:
- Write, edit, or delete any file
- Run migrations, artisan commands, or npm scripts
- Make any git operations
Planning Process
Phase 1: Task Analysis
Restate the task in your own words to confirm understanding:
TASK UNDERSTOOD:
Type : feature | update | fix
Description : {restatement in 1–2 sentences}
Technology : laravel | react | react-native | frontend | mixed
Complexity : low | medium | high (justify in 1 sentence)If the task is ambiguous, ask ONE clarifying question and wait for the answer before proceeding.
Phase 2: Impact Analysis
Using the reference files and codebase exploration, identify every area affected by this task:
IMPACT ANALYSIS:
─────────────────────────────────────────
Database changes? : yes / no
If yes → tables: [list], type: migration / seed / both
Backend changes? : yes / no
If yes → routes / controllers / services / repositories / models
Frontend changes? : yes / no
If yes → pages / components / hooks / stores / services
Mobile changes? : yes / no
If yes → screens / navigators / services
Config/env changes? : yes / no
If yes → [specify files and keys — NEVER commit actual values]
─────────────────────────────────────────Phase 3: Implementation Plan
List every file to be created or modified. For each file:
📝 CREATE src/services/ProductFilterService.php
→ New service class. Methods: filter(array $criteria): Builder
→ Called by: ProductController@index
✏️ MODIFY app/Http/Controllers/ProductController.php
→ Inject ProductFilterService. Update index() to accept filter params.
→ No other methods touched.
✏️ MODIFY references/{relevant_map}.md ← ALWAYS include the affected reference map(s)
→ Reflect the implementation so future tasks start from fresh project maps.Format each entry as:
{icon} {CREATE|MODIFY|DELETE} {file_path}
→ {what changes and why, 1–2 lines}
→ {dependencies or callers, if relevant}Icons: 📝 = new file, ✏️ = modify, 🗑️ = delete
Rules for the file list:
- Always include
references/{relevant_map}.mdas a MODIFY entry - List files in dependency order (models before services before controllers)
- If a migration is needed, list it FIRST
- Never include
vendor/,node_modules/,.envfiles
Phase 4: Risk Assessment
RISK ASSESSMENT:
──────────────────────────────────────
Overall risk : low | medium | high
Breaking change : yes / no
If yes → describe what breaks and what callers are affected
Database risk : none | additive | destructive
If destructive → requires lead sign-off before migration runs
Auth/Security : affected / not affected
If affected → flag to security-reviewer
Performance : no impact | minor impact | significant impact
If significant → describe expected impact
──────────────────────────────────────Phase 5: Approval Request
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
PLAN READY — AWAITING APPROVAL
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Files to create : {count}
Files to modify : {count}
Files to delete : {count}
Risk level : {level}
Respond with:
✅ approve — proceed to /implement-plan
✏️ revise {N} — clarify or change item N in the plan
❌ reject — cancel and explain why
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Do NOT proceed to implementation until the lead explicitly approves.
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.

