agentleFS
Sign inStart free
itsofficialadiitsofficialadi/boundiff/.agents/skills/implementation-plan/SKILL.md

implementation-plan

Skill0 starsChanged 22 days agoMITView on GitHub

Produce an executable, repository-grounded implementation plan with bounded steps and verification gates. Use for multi-file features or risky changes before coding; not for trivial edits.

24 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use code-quality.

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.
  • 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

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 22 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 6

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Read task scope, relevant AGENTS.md files, entry points, tests, and existing architecture.

    line 10
  2. Distinctive:

    Write the target outcome and 2 to 5 checkable acceptance criteria.

    line 11
  3. Distinctive:

    Prefer 3 credible steps over 15 microtasks.

    line 20
  4. Distinctive:

    No broad rewrite unless the current design actually blocks the goal.

    line 21
  5. Distinctive:

    Do not add tests that merely restate the implementation.

    line 22
  6. Distinctive:

    If critical requirements are unresolved, provide a conditional plan and identify the blocked step rather than pretending the plan is …

    line 23

“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

Implementation plan

A plan should lower implementation risk, not become a second specification. Plan-only mode: do not edit code, stage, or commit.

  1. Read task scope, relevant AGENTS.md files, entry points, tests, and existing architecture. Verify referenced files actually exist.
  2. Write the target outcome and 2 to 5 checkable acceptance criteria. Mark missing facts, defaults, and decisions requiring authority.
  3. Choose the smallest viable change path. Mention alternatives only where a tradeoff affects correctness, operational risk, or future compatibility.
  4. Divide work into bounded steps. For each step: likely paths, change intent, verification command or manual check, and an observable completion signal. Do not invent commands; label suggested commands not yet verified.
  5. Include contracts and failure paths: API consumers, validation, concurrency, data persistence, backwards compatibility, and rollback if relevant.
  6. Identify the first stop boundary, such as destructive migration, production credentials, externally visible behavior, or unreconciled Git state.
  7. Recommend the next execution skill: $surgical-change, $bug-fix-verification, $migration-safety, or $dependency-upgrade.

Quality bar

  • Prefer 3 credible steps over 15 microtasks.
  • No broad rewrite unless the current design actually blocks the goal.
  • Do not add tests that merely restate the implementation.
  • If critical requirements are unresolved, provide a conditional plan and identify the blocked step rather than pretending the plan is approved.

Output

Target, current evidence, steps with checks, risks/stops, assumptions, explicit non-goals. State that no implementation was performed.

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.

Check your setup, free