skill-writing-plans
- Repo stars 3,406
- Author updated Live
- Author repo claude-octopus
- Domain
- Writing
- Compatible agents
-
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- Cline
- Codex
- Windsurf
- Gemini CLI
- +20
- Trust score
- 88 / 100 · community maintained
- Author / version / license
- @nyldn · no license declared
- Token usage
- Lean
- Setup complexity
- Guided setup
- External API key
- Not required
- Operating systems
- macOS · Linux · Windows
- Runtime requirements
- No special requirements
- Permissions
-
- Read-only
- Write / modify
- Shell exec
- Network behavior
- Local-only
- Install commands
- 26 variants
Profile is derived at build time from SKILL.md and install vectors. Subject to drift from author intent.
Heads up: 未限定 allowed-tools,默认拥有全部工具权限。
---
name: skill-writing-plans
description: Create zero-context implementation plans with bite-sized tasks — use for multi-step feature plan…
category: writing
runtime: no special runtime
---
# skill-writing-plans output preview
## PART A: Task fit
- Use case: Create zero-context implementation plans with bite-sized tasks — use for multi-step feature planning Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for the codebase and questionable taste. Document everything: which files to touch, complete code, how to test, how to verify. runs entirely locally. Works with Claude Code, Cu….
- Inputs: target material, constraints, expected output, and acceptance criteria.
- Evidence boundary: follow “MANDATORY COMPLIANCE — DO NOT SKIP / Overview / Plan Document Structure” and do not present inference as author intent.
## PART B: Execution result
- **01** The card summarizes the use case; runtime output centers on “Create zero-context implementation plans with bite-sized tasks — use for multi-step feature planning Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for the codebase and questionable taste. Document everything: which files to touch, complete code, how to test, how to verify. runs entirely locally. Works with Claude Code, Cu…”.
- **02** When the source has headings, the agent prioritizes “MANDATORY COMPLIANCE — DO NOT SKIP / Overview / Plan Document Structure” so the result follows the author’s structure.
- **03** Typical output includes task judgment, concrete steps, required commands or file edits, validation, and follow-up options.
- **04** Risk context follows the fingerprint: read files, write/modify files, run shell commands; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
## Running Rules
- read files, write/modify files, run shell commands; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
- Validate with a small sample before expanding scope.
- Return the result, validation criteria, and next iteration options. The source mentions slash commands such as `/octo`; use them first when your agent supports command triggers.
Name target files or source material, expected output, forbidden changes, and whether network or shell access is allowed. Permission fingerprint: read files, write/modify files, run shell commands.
Start with a small task and check whether the result follows “MANDATORY COMPLIANCE — DO NOT SKIP / Overview / Plan Document Structure”. Inspect diffs, logs, previews, or tests before expanding scope.
Confirm the final output includes a concrete result, evidence, and next action. If it stays generic, tighten inputs, boundaries, and acceptance criteria.
---
name: skill-writing-plans
description: Create zero-context implementation plans with bite-sized tasks — use for multi-step feature plan…
category: writing
source: nyldn/claude-octopus
---
# skill-writing-plans
## When to use
- Create zero-context implementation plans with bite-sized tasks — use for multi-step feature planning Write comprehensi…
- Use it when the task has clear inputs, repeatable steps, and validation criteria.
## What to provide
- Target material, scope, expected result, and forbidden changes.
- Whether network, commands, file writes, or external services are allowed.
## Execution rules
- Organize steps around “MANDATORY COMPLIANCE — DO NOT SKIP / Overview / Plan Document Structure” and keep inference separate from source facts.
- read files, write/modify files, run shell commands; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
- Validate with a small sample before expanding the task.
## Output requirements
- Return the deliverable, key evidence, validation method, and next action.
- Mark missing information as unknown; do not invent commands, platforms, or dependencies. The author source anchors workflow facts; repository files anchor sources and commands; Fluxly only adds fit, limitations, and quality judgment.
skill "skill-writing-plans" {
input -> user goal + target files + boundaries + acceptance criteria
context -> MANDATORY COMPLIANCE — DO NOT SKIP / Overview / Plan Document Structure
rules -> SKILL.md triggers / order / output contract
runtime -> no special runtime | read files, write/modify files, run shell commands | mostly runs locally
guardrails -> usually needs no extra API key + small-sample validation + diff/log review
output -> copyable result + checklist + next iteration
} Host: Codex CLI — This skill was designed for Claude Code and adapted for Codex. Cross-reference commands use installed skill names in Codex rather than
/octo:*slash commands. Use the active Codex shell and subagent tools. Do not claim a provider, model, or host subagent is available until the current session exposes it. For host tool equivalents, seeskills/blocks/codex-host-adapter.md.
Writing Plans
MANDATORY COMPLIANCE — DO NOT SKIP
When this skill is invoked, you MUST produce a full implementation plan following the structure below. You are PROHIBITED from:
- Skipping the plan and jumping straight to implementation
- Producing a vague outline instead of the zero-context plan format
- Deciding the task is "simple enough" to not need a plan
- Omitting file paths, complete code, test instructions, or verification steps
The user asked for a plan, not an implementation. Write the plan first.
Your first output line MUST be: 🐙 **CLAUDE OCTOPUS ACTIVATED** - Implementation Planning
Overview
Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for the codebase and questionable taste.
Document everything: which files to touch, complete code, how to test, how to verify.
Principles: DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.
Plan Document Structure
Header (Required)
# [Feature Name] Implementation Plan
**Goal:** [One sentence describing what this builds]
**Architecture:** [2-3 sentences about approach]
**Tech Stack:** [Key technologies/libraries]
**Estimated Time:** [X tasks × 5 min = Y minutes]
## Prerequisites
- [ ] [Any setup needed before starting]
- [ ] [Dependencies to install]
- [ ] [Files that must exist]
Task Granularity
Each task is ONE action (2-5 minutes):
| Good (Single Action) | Bad (Multiple Actions) |
|---|---|
| "Write the failing test" | "Write tests and implement" |
| "Run test to verify it fails" | "Make it work" |
| "Implement minimal code to pass" | "Add the feature" |
| "Commit with message" | "Finish the feature" |
Task Template
### Task N: [Component Name]
**Files:**
- Create: `exact/path/to/new-file.ts`
- Modify: `exact/path/to/existing.ts` (lines 45-67)
- Test: `tests/exact/path/to/test.spec.ts`
**Step 1: Write failing test**
```typescript
// tests/exact/path/to/test.spec.ts
describe('ComponentName', () => {
it('should do specific thing', () => {
const result = functionName(input);
expect(result).toBe(expected);
});
});
Step 2: Run test to verify it fails
npm test tests/exact/path/to/test.spec.ts
Expected output:
FAIL: expected 'expected' but got undefined
Step 3: Implement minimal code
// exact/path/to/new-file.ts
export function functionName(input: InputType): OutputType {
// Minimal implementation
return expected;
}
Step 4: Run test to verify it passes
npm test tests/exact/path/to/test.spec.ts
Expected output:
PASS: 1/1 tests passed
Step 5: Commit
git add tests/exact/path/to/test.spec.ts exact/path/to/new-file.ts
git commit -m "feat(component): add specific functionality"
## Example: Complete Task
```markdown
### Task 3: Add Email Validation
**Files:**
- Create: `src/validators/email.ts`
- Test: `tests/validators/email.spec.ts`
**Step 1: Write failing test**
```typescript
// tests/validators/email.spec.ts
import { validateEmail } from '../src/validators/email';
describe('validateEmail', () => {
it('returns error for empty email', () => {
const result = validateEmail('');
expect(result).toEqual({ valid: false, error: 'Email required' });
});
it('returns error for invalid format', () => {
const result = validateEmail('not-an-email');
expect(result).toEqual({ valid: false, error: 'Invalid email format' });
});
it('returns valid for correct email', () => {
const result = validateEmail('user@example.com');
expect(result).toEqual({ valid: true });
});
});
Step 2: Run test to verify it fails
npm test tests/validators/email.spec.ts
Expected: Cannot find module '../src/validators/email'
Step 3: Implement minimal code
// src/validators/email.ts
interface ValidationResult {
valid: boolean;
error?: string;
}
export function validateEmail(email: string): ValidationResult {
if (!email || !email.trim()) {
return { valid: false, error: 'Email required' };
}
const emailRegex = /^[^\s@]+@[^\s@]+\.[^\s@]+$/;
if (!emailRegex.test(email)) {
return { valid: false, error: 'Invalid email format' };
}
return { valid: true };
}
Step 4: Run test to verify it passes
npm test tests/validators/email.spec.ts
Expected: PASS: 3/3 tests passed
Step 5: Commit
git add src/validators/email.ts tests/validators/email.spec.ts
git commit -m "feat(validators): add email validation with tests"
## Integration with Claude Octopus
### Using Octopus for Plan Execution
After creating a plan, offer execution options:
```markdown
## Execution Options
**1. Sequential (this session)**
Execute tasks one by one with verification between each.
**2. Parallel (octopus tangle)**
Use Claude Octopus to parallelize independent tasks:
```bash
${HOME}/.claude-octopus/plugin/scripts/orchestrate.sh tangle "Execute implementation plan for [feature]"
3. Full workflow (octopus embrace) Research → Define → Implement → Deliver:
${HOME}/.claude-octopus/plugin/scripts/orchestrate.sh embrace "Implement [feature] per plan"
### Plan Storage (Claude Code v2.1.10)
Claude Octopus uses session-aware plan storage. Plans are automatically saved to:
~/.claude-octopus/plans/${CLAUDE_SESSION_ID}/YYYY-MM-DD-feature-name.md
This integrates with Claude Code's `plansDirectory` setting. To customize:
```json
// settings.json
{
"plansDirectory": "~/.claude-octopus/plans"
}
For project-local plans, save to docs/plans/:
mkdir -p docs/plans
# docs/plans/2026-01-17-user-authentication.md
Checklist for Good Plans
- Each task is 2-5 minutes (single action)
- Exact file paths (not "in the utils folder")
- Complete code (not "add validation logic")
- Exact commands with expected output
- TDD: test before implementation
- Commit after each task
Common Mistakes
| Mistake | Fix |
|---|---|
| "Add the validation" | Show exact code |
| "Update the tests" | Show exact test code |
| "In the config file" | config/app.config.ts line 23 |
| "Run the tests" | npm test path/to/specific.spec.ts |
| Large tasks (30+ min) | Break into 2-5 min steps |
| No verification | Add "Run X, expect Y" |
When to Create Plans
| Scenario | Use Plan? |
|---|---|
| Multi-step feature (3+ tasks) | Yes |
| Simple bug fix (1 task) | No, just do it |
| Uncertain scope | Yes (clarifies thinking) |
| Delegation to subagent | Yes (zero-context execution) |
| Complex refactoring | Yes |
| Config change | No |
Related Skills
- test-driven-development - Each task follows TDD cycle
- verification-before-completion - Verify each step
- finishing-branch - After all tasks complete
The Bottom Line
Plan exists → Engineer with zero context can execute
Otherwise → Not a complete plan
Exact paths. Complete code. Verification steps. No assumptions.
Decide Fit First
Design Intent
How To Use It
Boundaries And Review