project-planning
Skill1 starsChanged 9 months agoMITView on GitHub
Plan new projects: adaptive interview, tech decisions, fill all project documentation (project-knowledge) in one session.
- Reads credentials
18 other projects use a version of this, 2 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- github/github-mcp-servertheir own version, first seen Nov 15, 2026
- lengrufeng2008/dsh-skill-librarytheir own version, first seen Nov 15, 2026
- computedocean/Tech-Demo-BOTtheir own version, first seen Nov 15, 2026
- zhucl1006/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- britt/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- davidanthonyn/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
Other versions18 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 2
- AgentShekel/agentic-workflow★ 433% same
- stepanenkoviktor0110-boop/ai-dev-methodology★ 273% same
Wrote their own version · 16
- github/github-mcp-server★ 34ksame name
- peter-tu-zynkr/zynkr-skill-builder★ 21same name
- WaniWani-AI/sdk★ 18same name
- britt/agent-skills★ 11same name
- wedow/skills★ 8same name
- life-itself/skills★ 2same name
- computedocean/Tech-Demo-BOT★ 1same name
- poorvith-mp/skills-business★ 1same name
- teessmartai/Skills★ 1same name
- veithly/claude-product-workflow★ 1same name
6 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 repository20 other files it gives its agents.
- skills/skill-master/references/agents.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- code-reviewingSkill
- code-writingSkill
- deploy-pipelineSkill
- documentation-writingSkill
- feature-executionSkill
- infrastructure-setupSkill
- methodologySkill
- post-deploy-qaSkill
- pre-deploy-qaSkill
- prompt-masterSkill
- security-auditorSkill
- skill-masterSkill
- skill-test-designerSkill
- skill-testerSkill
- task-decompositionSkill
- tech-spec-planningSkill
- test-masterSkill
- user-spec-planningSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
23 rules. 0 are common, 21 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 16 edited versions we read keep these.
21
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
- Distinctive: line 28
One question at a time: Ask one question, wait for the answer, then form the next question based on the response.
- Distinctive: line 30
Build on answers: If user mentioned a domain — ask domain-relevant follow-ups.
- Distinctive: line 32
Confirm understanding: After 3-5 questions, briefly summarize what you understood.
- Distinctive: line 34
Help when stuck: When user says "not sure" or "don't know":
- Distinctive: line 37
Ask which is closer
- Distinctive: line 38
If still uncertain and optional — mark TBD, move on
- Distinctive: line 39
If still uncertain and required — break into simpler sub-questions
- Distinctive: line 41
Recount on scope changes: If user suddenly adds many features or reveals unexpected complexity — stop and recount total scope.
- Very specific: line 49
Verify that project-knowledge directory and CLAUDE.md exist.
- Distinctive: line 51
Ask user to describe the project in free form.
- Distinctive: line 69
All at once or phased?
- Distinctive: line 70
If phased: how to group features, what's MVP
- Distinctive: line 71
If migration: current system, data migration, risks, rollback plan
- Distinctive: line 76
Write a clear, non-vague project.md
- Distinctive: line 103
No open questions on technical choices
- Distinctive: line 109
Use Edit tool to replace template placeholders with real content.
- Distinctive: line 131
Leave code patterns, testing methods, and business rules sections minimal — filled during development as patterns emerge
- Distinctive: line 144
If post-launch features were discussed during the interview, offer to save them to a backlog.
- Distinctive: line 148
All output files from "Output Files" section created.
- Distinctive: line 154
Before presenting to user, verify:
- Distinctive: line 157
No template placeholders remain
- Very specific: line 163
Run documentation-reviewer agent (Task tool, sonnet) on the project.
- Distinctive: line 177
After approval, ask user if they want to commit.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 16 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
Project Planning
Conduct adaptive interview → make tech decisions → fill all project documentation in one session.
Output Files
Project Knowledge (.claude/skills/project-knowledge/references/):
- project.md — overview, audience, problem, key features, scope
- architecture.md — tech stack, project structure, dependencies, data model
- patterns.md — git workflow (code patterns, testing, business rules are filled later during development)
- deployment.md — platform, environment, CI/CD, monitoring
- ux-guidelines.md — only if project has significant UI
Interview Methodology
One question at a time. Ask one question, wait for the answer, then form the next question based on the response.
Build on answers. If user mentioned a domain — ask domain-relevant follow-ups. If they said something vague — clarify that specific point.
Confirm understanding. After 3-5 questions, briefly summarize what you understood. Catches misunderstandings early.
Help when stuck. When user says "not sure" or "don't know":
- Say it's OK
- Offer 2-3 common approaches for their type of project
- Ask which is closer
- If still uncertain and optional — mark TBD, move on
- If still uncertain and required — break into simpler sub-questions
Recount on scope changes. If user suddenly adds many features or reveals unexpected complexity — stop and recount total scope. Show the updated list, confirm you understood correctly.
If code exists. Scan the codebase in parallel with the interview to pre-fill technical decisions and ask more targeted questions.
Phase 1: Project Discovery
1.1 Interview
Verify that project-knowledge directory and CLAUDE.md exist. If missing — tell user to run /init-project first.
Ask user to describe the project in free form. Let them say as much or as little as they want.
Then ask adaptive questions to cover three areas:
Project Overview:
- What the project does (one-line + context)
- Who uses it and why (target audience + use case)
- What problem it solves (core pain point)
- 3-5 key features (high-level only)
- Scope boundaries (explicit exclusions)
Features & MVP:
- Key features with descriptions
- What's included in MVP (launch scope)
- What comes later (post-launch ideas) — note these for the backlog
- Priority for each: Critical / Important / Nice-to-have
Development Approach:
- All at once or phased?
- If phased: how to group features, what's MVP
- If migration: current system, data migration, risks, rollback plan
1.2 Checkpoint
Move to Phase 2 when you can:
- Write a clear, non-vague project.md
- List key features with priorities and MVP scope
- Describe the development approach
TBD is acceptable for optional aspects.
Phase 2: Technical Decisions
2.1 New Project (no code)
- Propose tech stack based on Phase 1: frontend, backend, database, key dependencies
- Verify choices against current docs (Context7 if available). Update if you find deprecations or better alternatives.
- Propose deployment: platform, CI/CD approach, environments
- Present proposal to user with rationale for each choice. Iterate until user approves.
2.2 Existing Code
- Extract stack from the codebase: package files, configs, directory structure
- Verify against current docs (Context7 if available)
- Confirm with user: show what you found, ask about gaps (deployment, missing pieces)
- Iterate until confirmed.
2.3 Checkpoint
Move to Phase 3 when:
- Tech stack (frontend, backend, database, key dependencies) approved by user
- Deployment platform and CI/CD approach agreed
- No open questions on technical choices
Phase 3: Fill Documentation
Documentation goal: someone opens these files and understands the project without reading code. Describe what exists, what it does, and why. Record decisions, operational details (server addresses, deploy procedures, log locations), high-level component overview. Write in prose, link to source files for code details. Each fact lives in one file only.
Use Edit tool to replace template placeholders with real content. Content language: English.
3.1 Project Knowledge Files
project.md — from Phase 1 interview:
- Project overview, target audience, core problem
- Key features with priorities and MVP scope
- Post-launch ideas (if discussed)
- Out of scope
architecture.md — from Phase 2 decisions + codebase analysis:
- Tech stack with "why" for each choice
- Project structure (directory tree)
- Key dependencies (only critical ones, not everything)
- External integrations
- Data flow
- Data model (fill if known, leave template sections if TBD)
patterns.md — fill git workflow section:
- Branch structure, branch decision criteria
- Testing requirements per branch
- Security gates (pre-commit, pre-push)
- Leave code patterns, testing methods, and business rules sections minimal — filled during development as patterns emerge
deployment.md — from Phase 2 decisions:
- Platform, type, rationale
- Deployment triggers (what deploys where)
- Environments and URLs
- Environment variables (reference .env.example)
- Monitoring: fill if configured, note "not yet configured" if not
ux-guidelines.md — only if project has significant UI. Skip entirely for CLIs, APIs, bots without custom UI.
3.2 Backlog (if applicable)
If post-launch features were discussed during the interview, offer to save them to a backlog. Ask user where to create the backlog file.
3.3 Checkpoint
All output files from "Output Files" section created. No template placeholders remain.
Phase 4: Review & Commit
4.1 Self-Verify
Before presenting to user, verify:
- project.md contains all key features discussed in interview
- architecture.md tech stack matches user-approved decisions from Phase 2
- No template placeholders remain
Fix any issues before proceeding.
4.2 Documentation Review
Run documentation-reviewer agent (Task tool, sonnet) on the project. Fix critical and major findings. Minor findings — fix or leave at your discretion.
4.3 Show Files
Show user the list of created files with links. Include ux-guidelines.md and backlog file if they were created. Ask if everything is correct or needs changes.
4.4 Iterate
- Changes requested → edit files → show updated list → repeat
- Questions → answer → continue waiting for approval
- Repeat until user approves
4.5 Commit
After approval, ask user if they want to commit. If yes — commit all created documentation files.
Final message: "Документация заполнена! Можно начинать разработку."
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.

