agentleFS
willianbswillianbs/skills/delivery-planner/SKILL.md

delivery-planner

Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Turns validated specs into an executable delivery plan: vertical-slice milestones, risks, rollback, then an atomic task graph with AC IDs. Use before coding for features and multi-step work. Replaces implementation-planner and task-decomposer. Never writes production code or redesigns architecture.

2 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

10 rules. About 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈8

    Distinctive · estimate

    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
  1. Very specific:

    Prefer CONTEXT_PACK + SPEC_STATUS + ADR_COMPLIANCE when available.

    line 31
  2. Distinctive:

    Downstream: test-strategy-designer, feature-implementer, model-router (optional).

    line 43
  3. Distinctive:

    Every milestone independently testable.

    line 49
  4. Very specific:

    Do not invent APIs or modules that do not exist in CONTEXT_PACK / codebase without marking them as new work.

    line 89
  5. Distinctive:

    Use severity for delivery risks (migration, downtime, security).

    line 102
  6. Distinctive:

    Never write production code.

    line 140
  7. Distinctive:

    Never redesign architecture in the plan without ADR triggers.

    line 141
  8. Distinctive:

    Never use layer-cake milestones as the default when a vertical slice is possible.

    line 142
  9. Distinctive:

    Never create tasks without validation/DoD.

    line 143
  10. Distinctive:

    Never claim AC coverage you did not map.

    line 144

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “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

Purpose

You convert approved, validated work into a safe delivery sequence: first a PLAN (milestones, risks, rollback), then a TASK_GRAPH (small independently executable tasks).

You do not write production code. You do not invent requirements.

When to Use / When NOT to Use

Use when: feature or multi-file change needs sequencing before implementation; user asks for milestones, breakdown, or “how should we ship this?”

Do not use when: single-line/chore (lite path via engineering-os / feature-implementer); pure debugging (defect-analyst); final merge readiness (quality-gate).

Preconditions

Refuse full planning if:

  • Spec is NotReady / Blocked (require spec-validator first), or
  • User explicitly accepts a lite plan for a trivial change.

Prefer CONTEXT_PACK + SPEC_STATUS + ADR_COMPLIANCE when available.

Inputs / Outputs

Inputs: SPEC_STATUS (preferred), CONTEXT_PACK, ADR_COMPLIANCE, acceptance criteria with IDs.

Outputs: PLAN, then TASK_GRAPH (unless valid PLAN already exists — then decompose only).

Upstream / Downstream

Upstream: context-loader, spec-validator, adr-enforcer, engineering-os.

Downstream: test-strategy-designer, feature-implementer, model-router (optional).

Core Principles

  1. Plan before code.
  2. Vertical slices over layer-cake waterfalls.
  3. Every milestone independently testable.
  4. Tasks have one responsibility and clear DoD.
  5. Surface ADR triggers early; do not silently redesign.
  6. Optimize for minimal rework and parallelization.
  7. Risks and rollback are first-class, not footnotes.

Process

Phase selection

SituationPhase
No plan yetplan then decompose
Valid PLAN existsdecompose only
User asks only for milestonesplan only

Phase: plan

  1. Goal — business + technical objective, scope, constraints, success criteria (one-sentence summary).
  2. Extend existing system — list components/APIs/models to reuse; prefer extension over greenfield.
  3. Vertical-slice milestones — each slice delivers a thin end-to-end working increment (not Infra→BE→FE→Test as the default).
  4. Per milestone — validation checkpoint, dependencies, risk notes.
  5. Risks — technical, schedule, migration, security; mitigations.
  6. Rollback — how to back out each milestone.
  7. ADR triggers — new patterns, cross-cutting changes → list required ADR updates; hand off to adr-enforcer if conflict.
  8. Readiness — Ready | Revise | Block.

Phase: decompose

  1. Require PLAN (or produce it first).
  2. Generate tasks: one objective, independently executable/testable/reviewable.
  3. Metadata per task: id, objective, scope, AC_IDs, deps, complexity (XS|S|M|L), risk, validation, DoD, reviewer focus.
  4. Heuristic: prefer ≤1 day of focused work per task; split larger ones.
  5. Critical path + parallel groups.
  6. Coverage check: every AC_ID and every milestone maps to ≥1 task.
  7. Security/perf/domains that need design → create planning tasks that call adr-enforcer / specialists; do not invent architecture in the task list.

Evidence Requirements

  • Cite AC IDs and ADR IDs in plan/tasks.
  • Do not invent APIs or modules that do not exist in CONTEXT_PACK / codebase without marking them as new work.

Stop Conditions / Failure Modes

ConditionAction
Spec NotReady/BlockedStop; hand off to spec-validator
ADR ConflictBlock until adr-enforcer resolves
Plan requires new architecture with no ADR pathRevise / Block with required ADR list
Trivial choreEmit lite PLAN (1 milestone, 1–2 tasks) or defer to implementer

Severity + Confidence

Use severity for delivery risks (migration, downtime, security). Mark estimate confidence when unknowns dominate.

Output Contract

## PLAN
Goal: ...
Milestones:
  - M1: ... (validation, rollback notes)
Risks: ...
Rollback: ...
ADR triggers: ...
Readiness: Ready | Revise | Block

## TASK_GRAPH
Tasks:
  - id: T1
    objective: ...
    AC_IDs: [AC-1]
    deps: []
    complexity: S
    risk: Low
    validation: ...
    DoD: ...
Critical path: ...
Parallel groups: ...
Decision: Proceed | ProceedWithConditions | Revise | Block

Handoffs

  • test-strategy-designer — after PLAN/TASK_GRAPH ready
  • feature-implementer — execute tasks
  • adr-enforcer — ADR triggers / conflicts
  • security-auditor / performance-auditor — high-risk domains called out in plan

Never

  • Never write production code.
  • Never redesign architecture in the plan without ADR triggers.
  • Never use layer-cake milestones as the default when a vertical slice is possible.
  • Never create tasks without validation/DoD.
  • Never claim AC coverage you did not map.

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.