plan-feature
Skill20 starsChanged 26 days agoUnlicenseView on GitHub
Orchestrates the test-first implementation planning workflow for feature implementation and spec changes. Use this skill whenever plan mode is active and the task involves implementing or adding a new feature, or changing an existing specification. Even if the user only says "plan this" or "how should we implement this", load this skill to ensure the full test-first planning workflow is followed.
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
- asta-nguyen/kamehadbtheir 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
- 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
- asta-nguyen/agent-devkit★ 4same 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 repository9 other files it gives its agents.
- code-writing-guideSkill
- edit-sceneSkill
- fix-bugSkill
- refine-testsSkill
- resolve-diagnosticsSkill
- run-testsSkill
- test-designing-guideSkill
- test-writing-guideSkill
- unity-yaml-editing-guideSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 29 edited versions we read keep these.
0
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 60
Do NOT include: test cases, manual tests, or any test design and verification instructions — those are the sole responsibility of the …
- Very specific: line 64
After Step 2, launch the test-designer agent with an Opus-class or more capable model set in the model parameter, so test design stays on a …
- Very specific: line 105
If still FAIL after one retry → Abort (see below)
- Very specific: line 109
Use AskUserQuestion to present the user with three options:
- Very specific: line 116
Read the critical files identified in the plan.
“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
Guide for plan mode. This skill defines the orchestration workflow for test-first implementation planning.
Mode Check
This skill requires plan mode. Before doing anything else, check the current mode:
ExitPlanModeis in the deferred tools list → not in plan mode → stop immediately and tell the user:"This skill (
/plan-feature) requires plan mode. Enter plan mode first: use/planor press Shift+Tab to toggle."ExitPlanModeis NOT in the deferred tools list (i.e., directly callable) → in plan mode → proceed.
Task Type Check
If the user's request is to investigate or fix a bug rather than implement a new feature, change a specification, or refactor, use ExitPlanMode immediately and guide the user to invoke the /fix-bug skill instead. The rest of this skill applies to feature implementation, spec changes, and refactoring only.
Plan Mode Workflow
Step 1: Initial Understanding
Launch Explore agents to understand the codebase relevant to the task.
TBD items: If the requirements or specifications explicitly contain the text "TBD" for any item, treat that item as non-existent — do not design or implement it. Only ask the user via AskUserQuestion if the TBD item is a prerequisite that cannot be deferred without blocking the overall design.
Step 2: Implementation Design (Plan Agent)
Launch a Plan agent to design the class/method structure. Include the following instruction in the Plan agent prompt:
Design the class/method seams with testability in mind:
- Prefer small, focused public interfaces
- Test through the same seam production code uses. Tests should exercise the same
public/internalAPI that production callers go through. Do not promote aprivatemethod or widen visibility merely to reach it from a test — by default, private stays private.- Sanctioned exception (reduce combinatorial coverage): When a method takes 3 or more parameters — a heuristic for the real trigger, which is that several independent conditions combine so exhaustive coverage cost explodes (this can also happen with fewer parameters that each take many values, and may not apply when the extra parameters don't drive branching) — extract the cohesive sub-logic (a pure computation or decision that depends on only 1–2 of those inputs) into its own unit. Prefer a standalone class or pure function when the logic stands on its own; fall back to an
internalmethod on the same class only when it cannot be cleanly separated from instance state. Give the extracted unitinternal(notpublic) visibility when it need not be reachable outside the assembly — the narrowed visibility is a consequence of the extraction, not the goal.- Inject dependencies via interfaces so they can be replaced with test doubles
- Avoid hidden static/global state and
newcalls inside constructors for external dependenciesNaming: If any class or public method name explicitly specified by the user is a poor fit for what the spec describes, propose a more appropriate alternative using
AskUserQuestionbefore finalizing the design. Accept the user's final choice without further challenge.TBD items: Any item explicitly marked "TBD" in the requirements or spec must be excluded from the design. Skip it silently unless it is structurally required to complete the design (in which case, ask via
AskUserQuestion).
The Plan agent output should include only:
- Class names and responsibilities
- Public and internal method signatures
- Dependency interfaces (if any)
- File placement: the file path for each new or modified class, and the assembly (
.asmdef) it belongs to — assembly boundaries drive test references andInternalsVisibleTo, so the implementer must not have to re-derive placement - Brief rationale for design decisions
Do NOT include test cases, manual tests, or any test design and verification instructions — those are the sole responsibility of the test-designer agent in Step 3.
Step 3: Test Case Design (test-designer Agent)
After Step 2, launch the test-designer agent with an Opus-class or more capable model set in the model parameter, so test design stays on a strong model even when the main session runs on a faster one. Use the following prompt structure:
## Requirements
[feature requirements]
## Implementation Design
[class names, public and internal method signatures, dependency interfaces, and design rationale from the Step 2 Plan agent]
## Existing Code Context
[relevant existing code structure from Step 1 Explore]
## Language Convention
[project language for test names and prose, e.g., Japanese]Rules for assembling the prompt:
- Under
Implementation Design, include only the design output — do NOT include any test cases or manual tests the Plan agent may have produced. Test design is thetest-designeragent's sole responsibility. - Do NOT add output format specifications. The
test-designeragent's output format is self-contained; caller-supplied format overrides produce non-standard output. - Always include
## Language Convention. Resolve the project language fromCLAUDE.md(look for the language specified for test method names / code comments). IfCLAUDE.mddoes not specify a language, default to English.
The test-designer agent returns:
- Test Cases across all layers (Editor tests, Unit tests, Integration tests, Visual verification tests, Manual tests) — ready to paste into the plan file as one block
- Testability Assessment (
TESTABILITY: PASS,WARN, orFAIL)
Handling the Testability Assessment
| Result | Action |
TESTABILITY: PASS | Proceed to Step 4 (Review) |
TESTABILITY: WARN | Proceed to Step 4; record the Testability Issues in the plan file's "Known Trade-offs" section |
TESTABILITY: FAIL | Loop back to Step 2 (see below); maximum 1 retry |
Loopback to Step 2 (on FAIL)
- Extract the "Testability Issues" table from the
test-designeragent output - Re-launch the Plan agent with:
- The previous design output
- The Testability Issues
- Instruction: "Revise the design to address the Testability Issues listed below"
- Re-run Step 3 with the revised design
- If still
FAILafter one retry → Abort (see below)
Abort (second consecutive FAIL)
Use AskUserQuestion to present the user with three options:
- Proceed with the current design despite testability concerns
- Exit plan mode to revise the requirements
- Provide explicit design hints and re-run Step 2
Step 4: Review
Read the critical files identified in the plan. Verify that the Plan agent's design and the test-designer agent's test cases are consistent with each other and with the user's intent.
Step 5: Write the Plan File
Assemble the plan file with the following sections:
- Context — why this change is needed
- Implementation Design — from Step 2 Plan agent output
- Test Cases — pasted verbatim as one block from the
test-designeragent output (all 5 layers: Editor tests, Unit tests, Integration tests, Visual verification tests, Manual tests). Do not rewrite, translate, or clean up the output — thetest-designeragent already applies the content restrictions intest-designing-guide. - Known Trade-offs — from
TESTABILITY: WARNissues (if any) - Development Workflow — Read
${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/assets/development-workflow-template.mdand paste its full contents verbatim as the body of this section in the plan file, then add any project-specific steps perCLAUDE.md
Step 6: Call ExitPlanMode
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
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.

