plan-phase
Skill6 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Build a detailed execution plan for a specific numbered implementation phase — tasks, files to touch, acceptance criteria, and tests — structured for Claude Code to execute. Use this skill whenever the user wants to understand, plan, scope, or break down a phase before building it. Trigger on intent: planning what a phase contains, deciding if a phase is too big to tackle in one session, or preparing work to hand off to /execute-phase. Common phrasings include "plan/break down/scope/detail phase X", "what goes into phase X", "what needs to happen in phase X", "is phase X too big" — but also trigger on any casual variation that expresses wanting to understand or organize a phase's work before coding begins. Do NOT trigger when the user is ready to start coding (use /execute-phase) or is checking status mid-execution.
5 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- buildomator/buildomatortheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- rosslevinsky/portable-agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
- zajca/pohunektheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- Pelmenya/slovotheir own version, first seen May 20, 2026
- alchemiststudiosDOTai/harness-engineeringtheir own version, first seen Mar 17, 2026
Other versions5 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 5
- alchemiststudiosDOTai/harness-engineering★ 104same name
- buildomator/buildomator★ 102same name
- rosslevinsky/portable-agent-skills★ 12same name
- zajca/pohunek★ 9same name
- Pelmenya/slovo★ 0same name
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 repository13 other files it gives its agents.
- ai-governanceSkill
- commit-phaseSkill
- comprehensive-testSkill
- diagnoseSkill
- execute-phaseSkill
- harmonizeSkill
- ideation-complexSkill
- ideation-researchSkill
- ideation-simpleSkill
- ideation-synthesizeSkill
- kickoffSkill
- tech-stackSkill
- verifySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.
3
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 15
Read all four source documents before writing anything.
- Distinctive: line 37
If you split, ask: "Phase $ARGUMENTS is large.
- Very specific: line 50
Write phase$ARGUMENTS_plan.md using this exact template.
- Distinctive: line 115
After writing the file, output:
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 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
Plan Phase
Build a structured execution plan for Phase $ARGUMENTS and write it to phase$ARGUMENTS_plan.md in the project root.
Step 1: Read the Source Documents
Read all four source documents before writing anything. Extract specific things from each:
implementation_plan.md— Find Phase $ARGUMENTS. Copy its task list verbatim — you're planning exactly what it specifies, not a reinterpretation.requirements.md— Find the requirement IDs this phase satisfies. You'll reference these in acceptance criteria.design.md— Pull relevant UI layouts, data models, and component patterns for this phase.technology_decisions.md— Extract constraints that affect implementation (auth patterns, DB layer, API conventions).
Also scan for existing phase*_plan.md files. Skim any prior phase plans to understand what's already built — so you don't re-plan completed work or misstate dependencies.
Step 2: Assess Phase Size
Count the tasks in Phase $ARGUMENTS from implementation_plan.md.
3–8 tasks spanning a single system boundary → plan the full phase as-is.
>8 tasks OR spans multiple system boundaries (e.g., DB schema + UI + email + auth) → split into labeled sub-phases:
- Phase $ARGUMENTSa: [first boundary]
- Phase $ARGUMENTSb: [second boundary]
- Phase $ARGUMENTSc: [third if needed]
If you split, ask: "Phase $ARGUMENTS is large. I've divided it into sub-phases Xa, Xb, Xc — [one line each]. Which would you like to plan first?"
If you're thinking... Do this instead "This phase is straightforward, I can plan it loosely" Loose plans produce loose implementations. Every task needs files-to-touch and acceptance criteria. "I'll figure out the details during execution" Execution is not the time for design decisions. That's how scope creep starts. "8 tasks is fine for one phase" The rule is 3-8. If you're at 8, check whether any task crosses a system boundary. If so, split. "The requirements doc covers this, I don't need to repeat it in the plan" The plan is the implementer's contract. It must be self-contained. REQ-IDs link back, but the plan states the work.
Step 3: Write the Plan
Write phase$ARGUMENTS_plan.md using this exact template. Keep all fields tight — this document is consumed by /execute-phase, not read by humans.
# Phase $ARGUMENTS: [Title from implementation_plan.md]
## Summary
| # | Task | Requirements |
|---|------|-------------|
| 1 | [Task name] | REQ-XX-1, REQ-XX-2 |
| 2 | [Task name] | REQ-XX-3 |
## Dependencies
- [ ] [Specific thing from a prior phase to verify before starting — e.g., "migration 0012 applied"]
- [ ] [Env var, service, or external dep that must exist]
*None — if no dependencies.*
---
## Tasks
### Task 1: [Name]
**What:** [One sentence — what to build or change]
**Files:**
- Create: `path/to/file.ts`
- Modify: `path/to/other.ts` — [what to add/change]
**AC:**
- [ ] [Specific, testable criterion — reference REQ-XX-1]
- [ ] [Another criterion]
- [ ] [For tasks with unusual security surface: relevant security criterion, e.g., "uploaded files validated for type and size before storage"]
---
### Task 2: [Name]
**What:** [One sentence]
**Files:**
- Modify: `path/to/file.ts` — [what to add/change]
**AC:**
- [ ] [Criterion]
---
[Repeat for all tasks]
---
## Tests
| Test | File | Verifies |
|------|------|---------|
| [test name] | `src/__tests__/foo.test.ts` | [behavior] |Step 4: Confirm
After writing the file, output:
Phase $ARGUMENTS plan written — [N] tasks.
1. [Task 1 name]
2. [Task 2 name]
...
Requirements satisfied: [REQ list]
Dependencies: [list or "none"]
Run `/execute-phase $ARGUMENTS` to build.When to Use
- User says "plan phase X", "break down phase X", "scope phase X", "what goes into phase X", "what needs to happen in phase X"
- Starting a new implementation phase from
implementation_plan.md
When NOT to Use
- Initial project setup →
/kickoff - Technology decisions →
/tech-stack - Ad-hoc feature with no
implementation_plan.md→ just ask Claude directly - Ready to build →
/execute-phase
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.

