<!-- SYNC:understand-code-first -->[IMPORTANT] Use
TaskCreateto break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting — including tasks for each file read. This prevents context loss from long files. For simple tasks, AI MUST ATTENTION ask user whether to skip.
<!-- /SYNC:understand-code-first -->Understand Code First — HARD-GATE: Do NOT write, plan, or fix until you READ existing code.
- Search 3+ similar patterns (
grep/glob) — citefile:lineevidence- Read existing files in target area — understand structure, base classes, conventions
- Run
python .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file> --direction both --jsonwhen.code-graph/graph.dbexists- Map dependencies via
connectionsorcallers_of— know what depends on your target- Write investigation to
.ai/workspace/analysis/for non-trivial tasks (3+ files)- Re-read analysis file before implementing — never work from memory alone
- NEVER invent new patterns when existing ones work — match exactly or document deviation
BLOCKED until:
- [ ]Read target files- [ ]Grep 3+ patterns- [ ]Graph trace (if graph.db exists)- [ ]Assumptions verified with evidence
docs/project-reference/domain-entities-reference.md— Domain entity catalog, relationships, cross-service sync (read when task involves business entities/models) (content auto-injected by hook — check for [Injected: ...] header before reading)
<!-- /SYNC:rationalization-prevention --> <!-- SYNC:estimation-framework -->Rationalization Prevention — AI skips steps via these evasions. Recognize and reject:
| Evasion | Rebuttal | | ---------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------- | | "Too simple for a plan" | Simple + wrong assumptions = wasted time. Plan anyway. | | "I'll test after" | RED before GREEN. Write/verify test first. | | "Already searched" | Show grep evidence with
file:line. No proof = no search. | | "Just do it" | Still need TaskCreate. Skip depth, never skip tracking. | | "Just a small fix" | Small fix in wrong location cascades. Verify file:line first. | | "Code is self-explanatory" | Future readers need evidence trail. Document anyway. | | "Combine steps to save time" | Combined steps dilute focus. Each step has distinct purpose. |
<!-- /SYNC:estimation-framework -->Estimation — Modified Fibonacci: 1(trivial) → 2(small) → 3(medium) → 5(large) → 8(very large) → 13(epic, SHOULD split) → 21(MUST ATTENTION split). Output
story_pointsandcomplexityin plan frontmatter. Complexity auto-derived: 1-2=Low, 3-5=Medium, 8=High, 13+=Critical.
docs/test-specs/— Test specifications by module (read existing TCs to include test strategy in plan)
<!-- /SYNC:plan-quality --> <!-- SYNC:iterative-phase-quality -->Plan Quality — Every plan phase MUST ATTENTION include test specifications.
- Add
## Test Specificationssection with TC-{FEAT}-{NNN} IDs to every phase file- Map every functional requirement to ≥1 TC (or explicit
TBDwith rationale)- TC IDs follow
TC-{FEATURE}-{NNN}format — reference by ID, never embed full content- Before any new workflow step: call
TaskListand re-read the phase file- On context compaction: call
TaskListFIRST — never create duplicate tasks- Verify TC satisfaction per phase before marking complete (evidence must be
file:line, not TBD)Mode: TDD-first → reference existing TCs with
Evidence: TBD. Implement-first → use TBD →/tdd-specfills after.
<!-- /SYNC:iterative-phase-quality -->Iterative Phase Quality — Score complexity BEFORE planning.
Complexity signals: >5 files +2, cross-service +3, new pattern +2, DB migration +2 Score >=6 → MUST ATTENTION decompose into phases. Each phase:
- ≤5 files modified
- ≤3h effort
- Follows cycle: plan → implement → review → fix → verify
- Do NOT start Phase N+1 until Phase N passes VERIFY
Phase success = all TCs pass + code-reviewer agent approves + no CRITICAL findings.
Before routing, assess complexity score. Score >=3 → plan MUST ATTENTION produce multiple phases with per-phase quality cycles.
Quick Summary
Goal: Intelligently create implementation plans by analyzing task complexity and routing to /plan-fast or /plan-hard.
Workflow:
- Analyze — Understand task, ask clarifying questions via AskUserQuestion
- Route — Decide
/plan-fast(simple) or/plan-hard(complex) based on scope - Create — Execute chosen plan variant, write plan to
plans/directory - Validate — Offer
/plan-reviewand/plan-validatefor quality assurance
Key Rules:
- PLANNING-ONLY: never implement, never use EnterPlanMode tool
- Parent skill for all plan-* variants (plan-fast, plan-hard, plan-ci, plan-cro, plan-two, plan-parallel)
- Always collaborate with user; ask decision questions, present options
- Always add final
/plan-validateand/plan-reviewtasks
Greenfield Mode
Auto-detected: If no existing codebase is found (no code directories like
src/,app/,lib/,server/,packages/, etc., no manifest files likepackage.json/*.sln/go.mod, no populatedproject-config.json), this skill switches to greenfield mode automatically. Planning artifacts (docs/, plans/, .claude/) don't count — the project must have actual code directories with content.
When greenfield is detected:
- ALWAYS route to
/plan-hard— greenfield planning requires deep research, never fast plans - Skip "MUST ATTENTION READ project-structure-reference.md" step (file won't exist or is placeholder)
- Enable web research for tech landscape analysis (WebSearch + WebFetch)
- Delegate architecture decisions to
solution-architectagent - Increase user interview frequency (AskUserQuestion at each major decision)
- If
/greenfieldworkflow is not already active, suggest it via AskUserQuestion:- "Activate Greenfield Project Init workflow (Recommended)" — full waterfall inception
- "Continue with standalone /plan-hard" — planning only, no full workflow
Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).
Variant Decision Guide
| If the task is... | Use | Why |
| -------------------------------- | -------------------- | -------------------------------------- |
| Simple, clear scope (<5 files) | /plan-fast | Lightweight plan, faster output |
| Complex, multi-layer, many files | /plan-hard | Deep research, comprehensive plan |
| CI/CD pipeline changes | /plan-ci | CI-specific context and validation |
| Cross-cutting refactor | /plan-cro | Cross-service impact analysis |
| Parallel implementation possible | /plan-parallel | Splits plan into parallelizable phases |
| Two competing approaches | /plan-two | Creates 2 plans for comparison |
| Analyzing existing plan | /plan-analysis | Reviews/critiques an existing plan |
| Archiving completed plan | /plan-archive | Moves plan to archive |
| General/unknown | /plan (this skill) | Routes automatically |
PLANNING-ONLY — Collaboration Required
DO NOT use the
EnterPlanModetool — you are ALREADY in a planning workflow. DO NOT implement or execute any code changes. COLLABORATE with the user: ask decision questions, present options with recommendations. After plan creation, ALWAYS useAskUserQuestiontool to offer/plan-reviewvalidation. ASK user to confirm the plan before any next step.
Your mission
<task> $ARGUMENTS </task>Pre-Creation Check (Active vs Suggested Plan Detection)
Check the ## Plan Context section in the injected context:
- If "Plan:" shows a path → Active plan exists. Ask user: "Active plan found: {path}. Continue with this? [Y/n]"
- If "Suggested:" shows a path → Branch-matched plan hint only. Ask user if they want to activate it or create new.
- If "Plan: none" → Proceed to create new plan using naming pattern from
## Namingsection.
Workflow
- Analyze the given task and use
AskUserQuestiontool to ask for more details if needed. - Decide to use
/plan-fastor/plan-hardSlashCommands based on the complexity. - Execute SlashCommand:
/plan-fast <detailed-instructions-prompt>or/plan-hard <detailed-instructions-prompt> - Activate
planningskill. - Note:
detailed-instructions-promptis an enhanced prompt that describes the task in detail based on the provided task description.
IMPORTANT Task Planning Notes (MUST ATTENTION FOLLOW)
- Always plan and break work into many small todo tasks using
TaskCreate - Always add a final review todo task to verify work quality and identify fixes/enhancements
- MANDATORY FINAL TASKS: After creating all planning todo tasks, ALWAYS add these three final tasks:
- Task: "Write test specifications for each phase" — Add
## Test Specificationswith TC-{FEAT}-{NNN} IDs to every phase file. Use/tdd-specif feature docs exist. UseEvidence: TBDfor TDD-first mode. - Task: "Run /plan-validate" — Trigger
/plan-validateskill to interview the user with critical questions and validate plan assumptions - Task: "Run /plan-review" — Trigger
/plan-reviewskill to auto-review plan for validity, correctness, and best practices
- Task: "Write test specifications for each phase" — Add
Important Notes
IMPORTANT: Analyze the skills catalog and activate the skills that are needed for the task during the process. IMPORTANT: Sacrifice grammar for the sake of concision when writing reports. IMPORTANT: Ensure token efficiency while maintaining high quality. IMPORTANT: In reports, list any unresolved questions at the end, if any.
REMINDER — Planning-Only Command
DO NOT use
EnterPlanModetool. DO NOT start implementing. ALWAYS useAskUserQuestiontool to offer/plan-reviewvalidation after plan creation. ASK user to confirm the plan before any implementation begins. ASK user decision questions usingAskUserQuestiontool when multiple approaches exist.
Standalone Review Gate (Non-Workflow Only)
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION: If this skill is called outside a workflow (standalone
/plan), the generated plan MUST ATTENTION include/review-changesas a final phase/task in the plan. This ensures all implementation changes get reviewed before commit even without a workflow enforcing it.If already running inside a workflow (e.g.,
feature,bugfix), skip this — the workflow sequence handles/review-changesat the appropriate step.
Workflow Recommendation
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — NO EXCEPTIONS: If you are NOT already in a workflow, you MUST ATTENTION use
AskUserQuestionto ask the user. Do NOT judge task complexity or decide this is "simple enough to skip" — the user decides whether to use a workflow, not you:
- Activate
pre-developmentworkflow (Recommended) — quality-gate → plan → plan-review → plan-validate- Execute
/plandirectly — run this skill standalone
Post-Plan Granularity Self-Check (MANDATORY)
<!-- SYNC:plan-granularity --><!-- /SYNC:plan-granularity -->Plan Granularity — Every phase must pass 5-point check before implementation:
- Lists exact file paths to modify (not generic "implement X")
- No planning verbs (research, investigate, analyze, determine, figure out)
- Steps ≤30min each, phase total ≤3h
- ≤5 files per phase
- No open decisions or TBDs in approach
Failing phases → create sub-plan. Repeat until ALL leaf phases pass (max depth: 3). Self-question: "Can I start coding RIGHT NOW? If any step needs 'figuring out' → sub-plan it."
After creating all phase files, run the recursive decomposition loop:
- Score each phase against the 5-point criteria (file paths, no planning verbs, ≤30min steps, ≤5 files, no open decisions)
- For each FAILING phase → create task to decompose it into a sub-plan (with its own /plan → /plan-review → /plan-validate → fix cycle)
- Re-score new phases. Repeat until ALL leaf phases pass (max depth: 3)
- Self-question: "For each phase, can I start coding RIGHT NOW? If any needs 'figuring out' → sub-plan it."
Next Steps (Standalone: MUST ATTENTION ask user via AskUserQuestion. Skip if inside workflow.)
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — NO EXCEPTIONS: If this skill was called outside a workflow, you MUST ATTENTION use
AskUserQuestionto present these options. Do NOT skip because the task seems "simple" or "obvious" — the user decides:
- "Proceed with full workflow (Recommended)" — I'll detect the best workflow to continue from here (plan created). This ensures review, validation, implementation, and testing steps aren't skipped.
- "/plan-review" — Auto-review plan for validity and best practices
- "/plan-validate" — Interview user to confirm plan decisions
- "Skip, continue manually" — user decides
If already inside a workflow, skip — the workflow handles sequencing.
Closing Reminders
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using
TaskCreateBEFORE starting - MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search codebase for 3+ similar patterns before creating new code
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite
file:lineevidence for every claim (confidence >80% to act) - MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION include Test Specifications section and story_points in plan frontmatter <!-- SYNC:plan-granularity:reminder -->
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION verify all phases pass 5-point granularity check. Failing phases → sub-plan. "Can I start coding RIGHT NOW?" <!-- /SYNC:plan-granularity:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:understand-code-first:reminder -->
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search 3+ existing patterns and read code BEFORE any modification. Run graph trace when graph.db exists. <!-- /SYNC:understand-code-first:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:rationalization-prevention:reminder -->
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION follow ALL steps regardless of perceived simplicity. "Too simple to plan" is an evasion, not a reason. <!-- /SYNC:rationalization-prevention:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:estimation-framework:reminder -->
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION include
story_pointsandcomplexityin plan frontmatter. SP > 8 = split. <!-- /SYNC:estimation-framework:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:plan-quality:reminder --> - MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION include
## Test Specificationswith TC IDs per phase. CallTaskListbefore creating new tasks. <!-- /SYNC:plan-quality:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:iterative-phase-quality:reminder --> - MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION score complexity first. Score >=6 → decompose. Each phase: plan → implement → review → fix → verify. No skipping. <!-- /SYNC:iterative-phase-quality:reminder -->