superkit-mcp-server 1.2.1 → 1.2.3
This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
- package/ARCHITECTURE.md +102 -102
- package/README.md +71 -71
- package/SUPERKIT.md +168 -168
- package/agents/code-archaeologist.md +106 -106
- package/agents/coder.md +90 -90
- package/agents/data-engineer.md +28 -28
- package/agents/devops-engineer.md +242 -242
- package/agents/git-manager.md +203 -203
- package/agents/orchestrator.md +420 -420
- package/agents/penetration-tester.md +188 -188
- package/agents/performance-optimizer.md +187 -187
- package/agents/planner.md +270 -270
- package/agents/qa-automation-engineer.md +103 -103
- package/agents/quant-developer.md +32 -32
- package/agents/reviewer.md +100 -100
- package/agents/scout.md +222 -222
- package/agents/security-auditor.md +3 -2
- package/agents/tester.md +274 -274
- package/agents/ui-designer.md +208 -208
- package/build/index.js +21 -2
- package/build/tools/__tests__/loggerTools.test.js +5 -5
- package/build/tools/archTools.js +2 -19
- package/build/tools/autoPreview.js +2 -2
- package/build/tools/compoundTools.js +4 -4
- package/build/tools/docsTools.js +5 -10
- package/build/tools/loggerTools.js +1 -1
- package/build/tools/todoTools.js +39 -39
- package/build/tools/validators/__tests__/apiSchema.test.js +23 -23
- package/build/tools/validators/__tests__/convertRules.test.js +5 -5
- package/build/tools/validators/__tests__/frontendDesign.test.js +12 -12
- package/build/tools/validators/__tests__/geoChecker.test.js +19 -19
- package/build/tools/validators/__tests__/mobileAudit.test.js +12 -12
- package/build/tools/validators/__tests__/reactPerformanceChecker.test.js +17 -17
- package/build/tools/validators/__tests__/securityScan.test.js +6 -6
- package/build/tools/validators/__tests__/seoChecker.test.js +16 -16
- package/build/tools/validators/__tests__/typeCoverage.test.js +14 -14
- package/build/tools/validators/convertRules.js +2 -2
- package/commands/README.md +122 -122
- package/commands/ask.toml +72 -72
- package/commands/brainstorm.toml +119 -119
- package/commands/chat.toml +77 -77
- package/commands/code-preview.toml +37 -37
- package/commands/code.toml +28 -28
- package/commands/content.toml +200 -200
- package/commands/cook.toml +77 -77
- package/commands/copywrite.toml +131 -131
- package/commands/db.toml +192 -192
- package/commands/debug.toml +166 -166
- package/commands/design.toml +158 -158
- package/commands/dev-rules.toml +14 -14
- package/commands/do.toml +117 -117
- package/commands/doc-rules.toml +14 -14
- package/commands/docs.toml +148 -148
- package/commands/fix.toml +440 -440
- package/commands/fullstack.toml +175 -175
- package/commands/git.toml +235 -235
- package/commands/help.toml +84 -84
- package/commands/integrate.toml +127 -127
- package/commands/journal.toml +136 -136
- package/commands/kit-setup.toml +40 -40
- package/commands/mcp.toml +183 -183
- package/commands/orchestration.toml +15 -15
- package/commands/plan.toml +171 -171
- package/commands/pm.toml +148 -148
- package/commands/pr.toml +50 -50
- package/commands/project.toml +32 -32
- package/commands/research.toml +117 -117
- package/commands/review-pr.toml +63 -63
- package/commands/review.toml +190 -190
- package/commands/scout-ext.toml +97 -97
- package/commands/scout.toml +79 -79
- package/commands/screenshot.toml +65 -65
- package/commands/session.toml +102 -102
- package/commands/skill.toml +384 -384
- package/commands/status.toml +22 -22
- package/commands/team.toml +56 -56
- package/commands/test.toml +164 -164
- package/commands/ticket.toml +70 -70
- package/commands/use.toml +106 -106
- package/commands/video.toml +83 -83
- package/commands/watzup.toml +71 -71
- package/commands/workflow.toml +14 -14
- package/package.json +35 -35
- package/skills/meta/README.md +30 -30
- package/skills/meta/api-design/SKILL.md +134 -134
- package/skills/meta/code-review/SKILL.md +44 -44
- package/skills/meta/code-review/checklists/pre-merge.md +25 -25
- package/skills/meta/code-review/workflows/architecture-pass.md +26 -26
- package/skills/meta/code-review/workflows/performance-pass.md +27 -27
- package/skills/meta/code-review/workflows/security-pass.md +29 -29
- package/skills/meta/compound-docs/SKILL.md +133 -133
- package/skills/meta/debug/SKILL.md +40 -40
- package/skills/meta/debug/templates/bug-report.template.md +31 -31
- package/skills/meta/debug/workflows/reproduce-issue.md +20 -20
- package/skills/meta/docker/SKILL.md +126 -126
- package/skills/meta/examples/supabase/SKILL.md +46 -46
- package/skills/meta/examples/supabase/references/best-practices.md +319 -319
- package/skills/meta/examples/supabase/references/common-patterns.md +373 -373
- package/skills/meta/examples/supabase/templates/migration-template.sql +49 -49
- package/skills/meta/examples/supabase/templates/rls-policy-template.sql +77 -77
- package/skills/meta/examples/supabase/workflows/debugging.md +260 -260
- package/skills/meta/examples/supabase/workflows/migration-workflow.md +211 -211
- package/skills/meta/examples/supabase/workflows/rls-policies.md +244 -244
- package/skills/meta/examples/supabase/workflows/schema-design.md +321 -321
- package/skills/meta/file-todos/SKILL.md +88 -88
- package/skills/meta/mobile/SKILL.md +140 -140
- package/skills/meta/nextjs/SKILL.md +101 -101
- package/skills/meta/performance/SKILL.md +130 -130
- package/skills/meta/react-patterns/SKILL.md +83 -83
- package/skills/meta/security/SKILL.md +114 -114
- package/skills/meta/session-resume/SKILL.md +96 -96
- package/skills/meta/tailwind/SKILL.md +139 -139
- package/skills/meta/testing/SKILL.md +43 -43
- package/skills/meta/testing/references/vitest-patterns.md +45 -45
- package/skills/meta/testing/templates/component-test.template.tsx +37 -37
- package/skills/tech/alpha-vantage/SKILL.md +142 -142
- package/skills/tech/alpha-vantage/references/commodities.md +153 -153
- package/skills/tech/alpha-vantage/references/economic-indicators.md +158 -158
- package/skills/tech/alpha-vantage/references/forex-crypto.md +154 -154
- package/skills/tech/alpha-vantage/references/fundamentals.md +223 -223
- package/skills/tech/alpha-vantage/references/intelligence.md +138 -138
- package/skills/tech/alpha-vantage/references/options.md +93 -93
- package/skills/tech/alpha-vantage/references/technical-indicators.md +374 -374
- package/skills/tech/alpha-vantage/references/time-series.md +157 -157
- package/skills/tech/doc.md +6 -6
- package/skills/tech/financial-modeling/SKILL.md +18 -18
- package/skills/tech/financial-modeling/skills/3-statements/SKILL.md +368 -368
- package/skills/tech/financial-modeling/skills/3-statements/references/formatting.md +118 -118
- package/skills/tech/financial-modeling/skills/3-statements/references/formulas.md +292 -292
- package/skills/tech/financial-modeling/skills/3-statements/references/sec-filings.md +125 -125
- package/skills/tech/financial-modeling/skills/dcf-model/SKILL.md +1210 -1210
- package/skills/tech/financial-modeling/skills/dcf-model/TROUBLESHOOTING.md +40 -40
- package/skills/tech/financial-modeling/skills/dcf-model/requirements.txt +8 -8
- package/skills/tech/financial-modeling/skills/dcf-model/scripts/validate_dcf.py +292 -292
- package/skills/tech/financial-modeling/skills/lbo-model/SKILL.md +236 -236
- package/skills/tech/financial-modeling/skills/merger-model/SKILL.md +108 -108
- package/skills/workflows/README.md +203 -203
- package/skills/workflows/adr.md +174 -174
- package/skills/workflows/changelog.md +74 -74
- package/skills/workflows/compound.md +323 -323
- package/skills/workflows/compound_health.md +74 -74
- package/skills/workflows/create-agent-skill.md +138 -139
- package/skills/workflows/cycle.md +144 -144
- package/skills/workflows/deploy-docs.md +84 -84
- package/skills/workflows/development-rules.md +42 -42
- package/skills/workflows/doc.md +95 -95
- package/skills/workflows/documentation-management.md +34 -34
- package/skills/workflows/explore.md +146 -146
- package/skills/workflows/generate_command.md +106 -106
- package/skills/workflows/heal-skill.md +97 -97
- package/skills/workflows/housekeeping.md +229 -229
- package/skills/workflows/kit-setup.md +102 -102
- package/skills/workflows/map-codebase.md +78 -78
- package/skills/workflows/orchestration-protocol.md +43 -43
- package/skills/workflows/plan-compound.md +439 -439
- package/skills/workflows/plan_review.md +269 -269
- package/skills/workflows/primary-workflow.md +37 -37
- package/skills/workflows/promote_pattern.md +86 -86
- package/skills/workflows/release-docs.md +82 -82
- package/skills/workflows/report-bug.md +135 -135
- package/skills/workflows/reproduce-bug.md +118 -118
- package/skills/workflows/resolve_pr.md +133 -133
- package/skills/workflows/resolve_todo.md +128 -128
- package/skills/workflows/review-compound.md +376 -376
- package/skills/workflows/skill-review.md +127 -127
- package/skills/workflows/specs.md +257 -257
- package/skills/workflows/triage-sprint.md +102 -102
- package/skills/workflows/triage.md +152 -152
- package/skills/workflows/work.md +399 -399
- package/skills/workflows/xcode-test.md +93 -93
|
@@ -1,439 +1,439 @@
|
|
|
1
|
-
---
|
|
2
|
-
description: (Compound) Transform feature descriptions into well-structured project plans with solution search and pattern checks.
|
|
3
|
-
---
|
|
4
|
-
|
|
5
|
-
# /plan-compound - Research and Plan Before Building
|
|
6
|
-
|
|
7
|
-
Transform feature descriptions, bug reports, or improvement ideas into well-structured plans that follow project conventions and best practices.
|
|
8
|
-
|
|
9
|
-
> **Why plan first?** Research before coding prevents building the wrong thing. A 30-minute plan saves hours of rework.
|
|
10
|
-
>
|
|
11
|
-
> **Note:** This is the Compound version with solution search and pattern checks. For quick planning, use `/plan`.
|
|
12
|
-
|
|
13
|
-
|
|
14
|
-
## When To Use
|
|
15
|
-
|
|
16
|
-
- Before any feature taking >2 hours
|
|
17
|
-
- For bugs requiring investigation
|
|
18
|
-
- When exploring unfamiliar codebase areas
|
|
19
|
-
- Before architectural changes
|
|
20
|
-
|
|
21
|
-
---
|
|
22
|
-
|
|
23
|
-
## Workflow
|
|
24
|
-
|
|
25
|
-
### Step 0: Search Existing Solutions (MANDATORY)
|
|
26
|
-
|
|
27
|
-
> [!CAUTION]
|
|
28
|
-
> **BLOCKING STEP.** You MUST complete this before proceeding. Skipping wastes time re-solving known problems.
|
|
29
|
-
|
|
30
|
-
**Run the auto-searcher:**
|
|
31
|
-
```bash
|
|
32
|
-
// turbo
|
|
33
|
-
Call MCP `call_tool_logger_manager` { action: "logWorkflow", name: "/plan", outcome: "success" }
|
|
34
|
-
Call MCP `call_tool_compound_manager` { action: "search", terms: [ "{keyword1}" "{keyword2}"] }
|
|
35
|
-
```
|
|
36
|
-
|
|
37
|
-
**See also:** `skills/compound-docs/SKILL.md` for advanced searching and pattern promotion.
|
|
38
|
-
|
|
39
|
-
**Output required:**
|
|
40
|
-
Copy the **table** AND the **update command** from the script output into your plan.
|
|
41
|
-
|
|
42
|
-
**If relevant solutions found:**
|
|
43
|
-
1. List them in the plan under "## Prior Solutions"
|
|
44
|
-
2. Execute the update command to track usage:
|
|
45
|
-
```bash
|
|
46
|
-
// turbo
|
|
47
|
-
Call MCP `call_tool_compound_manager` { action: "updateRef", files: ["{paths from search output}"] }
|
|
48
|
-
```
|
|
49
|
-
|
|
50
|
-
---
|
|
51
|
-
|
|
52
|
-
#### ⛔ VALIDATION CHECKPOINT
|
|
53
|
-
|
|
54
|
-
Before proceeding to Step 0.5, confirm:
|
|
55
|
-
|
|
56
|
-
- [ ] Ran `
|
|
57
|
-
- [ ] Reviewed all matching solutions (or confirmed none found)?
|
|
58
|
-
- [ ] Ran `
|
|
59
|
-
|
|
60
|
-
**If any box is unchecked:** Complete it now. Do NOT proceed.
|
|
61
|
-
|
|
62
|
-
---
|
|
63
|
-
|
|
64
|
-
### Step 0.5: Check Active Specs
|
|
65
|
-
|
|
66
|
-
Before creating a standalone plan, check if this work belongs to an active spec:
|
|
67
|
-
|
|
68
|
-
```bash
|
|
69
|
-
ls docs/specs/*/README.md 2>/dev/null | grep -v templates
|
|
70
|
-
```
|
|
71
|
-
|
|
72
|
-
**If active spec found:**
|
|
73
|
-
1. Read `docs/specs/{name}/00-START-HERE.md` for context
|
|
74
|
-
2. Determine if this plan belongs to the spec
|
|
75
|
-
3. If yes, create plan in `docs/specs/{name}/plans/{phase}-{description}.md`
|
|
76
|
-
4. Link to parent spec in plan header
|
|
77
|
-
5. Reference current phase from spec's `03-tasks.md`
|
|
78
|
-
|
|
79
|
-
**If no active spec (or work is unrelated):** Proceed with standalone plan in `plans/`.
|
|
80
|
-
|
|
81
|
-
> [!TIP]
|
|
82
|
-
> Use `/specs` first if this is multi-week work that should have its own specification.
|
|
83
|
-
|
|
84
|
-
### Step 0.6: Pattern Awareness (MANDATORY)
|
|
85
|
-
|
|
86
|
-
> [!CAUTION]
|
|
87
|
-
> **BLOCKING STEP.** Before creating your plan, review the critical patterns to avoid reinventing solutions to known problems.
|
|
88
|
-
|
|
89
|
-
```bash
|
|
90
|
-
# Quick review of critical patterns
|
|
91
|
-
cat docs/solutions/patterns/critical-patterns.md | grep "^### Pattern"
|
|
92
|
-
```
|
|
93
|
-
|
|
94
|
-
**Key patterns to consider during planning:**
|
|
95
|
-
- Pattern #9: Rigorous Planning (Multi-Order Thinking)
|
|
96
|
-
- Pattern #10: Atomic State Transitions
|
|
97
|
-
- Pattern #3: Actionable Items → Todo Files
|
|
98
|
-
|
|
99
|
-
**Why this matters:** These patterns exist because the same mistakes were made 3+ times. Consulting them now prevents wasted effort.
|
|
100
|
-
|
|
101
|
-
---
|
|
102
|
-
|
|
103
|
-
### Step 1: Clarify Requirements
|
|
104
|
-
|
|
105
|
-
If the request is vague, ask clarifying questions:
|
|
106
|
-
|
|
107
|
-
```
|
|
108
|
-
Before I create a plan, I have some questions:
|
|
109
|
-
|
|
110
|
-
1. What problem does this solve for users?
|
|
111
|
-
2. Are there any constraints (timeline, tech stack, etc.)?
|
|
112
|
-
3. Should this integrate with existing features?
|
|
113
|
-
```
|
|
114
|
-
|
|
115
|
-
**Do not proceed until requirements are clear.**
|
|
116
|
-
|
|
117
|
-
### Step 2: Research Phase
|
|
118
|
-
|
|
119
|
-
Gather context from multiple sources in parallel:
|
|
120
|
-
|
|
121
|
-
**Codebase Research:**
|
|
122
|
-
- [ ] Find similar implementations in the codebase
|
|
123
|
-
- [ ] Identify relevant files and patterns
|
|
124
|
-
- [ ] Check for existing utilities/helpers to reuse
|
|
125
|
-
- [ ] Review related tests for expected behavior
|
|
126
|
-
|
|
127
|
-
**Documentation Research:**
|
|
128
|
-
- [ ] Check project README, CLAUDE.md, or GEMINI.md
|
|
129
|
-
- [ ] Review any existing docs for the feature area
|
|
130
|
-
- [ ] Look for team conventions and standards
|
|
131
|
-
|
|
132
|
-
**External Research:**
|
|
133
|
-
- [ ] Find best practices for this type of feature
|
|
134
|
-
- [ ] Check framework documentation for recommended approaches
|
|
135
|
-
- [ ] Look for common pitfalls to avoid
|
|
136
|
-
|
|
137
|
-
**Reference Collection:**
|
|
138
|
-
Document all findings with specific references:
|
|
139
|
-
- File paths: `src/services/auth.ts:42`
|
|
140
|
-
- URLs: `https://docs.example.com/auth`
|
|
141
|
-
- Issues: `#123`, `#456`
|
|
142
|
-
|
|
143
|
-
### Step 3: Analyze and Identify Gaps
|
|
144
|
-
|
|
145
|
-
Review collected research for:
|
|
146
|
-
|
|
147
|
-
- [ ] Edge cases not covered
|
|
148
|
-
- [ ] Potential conflicts with existing code
|
|
149
|
-
- [ ] Missing dependencies
|
|
150
|
-
- [ ] Security considerations
|
|
151
|
-
- [ ] Performance implications
|
|
152
|
-
|
|
153
|
-
### Step 3.5: Deep Analysis (Think Hard)
|
|
154
|
-
|
|
155
|
-
> [!IMPORTANT]
|
|
156
|
-
> Don't rush to solutions. Invest time in rigorous analysis now to avoid costly surprises later.
|
|
157
|
-
|
|
158
|
-
**Multi-Order Thinking:**
|
|
159
|
-
- [ ] **1st order:** What does this change directly affect?
|
|
160
|
-
- [ ] **2nd order:** What depends on those affected things?
|
|
161
|
-
- [ ] **3rd order:** What cascading effects could occur?
|
|
162
|
-
- [ ] **4th order:** Could this affect unrelated systems through shared dependencies?
|
|
163
|
-
|
|
164
|
-
**Long-Term Implications:**
|
|
165
|
-
- [ ] How will this age in 6 months? 1 year?
|
|
166
|
-
- [ ] Does this create technical debt or reduce it?
|
|
167
|
-
- [ ] Is this approach reversible if we're wrong?
|
|
168
|
-
- [ ] Will future maintainers understand the "why"?
|
|
169
|
-
|
|
170
|
-
**Edge Cases (Leave No Stone Unturned):**
|
|
171
|
-
- [ ] Empty/null/undefined inputs
|
|
172
|
-
- [ ] Boundary conditions (min, max, exactly-at-limit)
|
|
173
|
-
- [ ] Concurrent/race conditions
|
|
174
|
-
- [ ] Failure modes (network, database, external services)
|
|
175
|
-
- [ ] User behavior extremes (fast clicking, back button, refresh)
|
|
176
|
-
- [ ] Data migration scenarios
|
|
177
|
-
- [ ] Rollback scenarios
|
|
178
|
-
|
|
179
|
-
**Stakeholder Impact Analysis:**
|
|
180
|
-
- [ ] **End Users:** Will this change behavior they rely on? UX disruption?
|
|
181
|
-
- [ ] **Other Developers:** Breaking API changes? Documentation needs?
|
|
182
|
-
- [ ] **Operations/Support:** New failure modes? Monitoring/alerting updates?
|
|
183
|
-
- [ ] **Downstream Systems:** Integrations affected? Consumer contracts broken?
|
|
184
|
-
- [ ] **Business Stakeholders:** Timeline/scope implications? Resource needs?
|
|
185
|
-
- [ ] **Security/Compliance:** Data handling changes? Audit requirements?
|
|
186
|
-
|
|
187
|
-
### Step 4: Choose Detail Level
|
|
188
|
-
|
|
189
|
-
**📄 MINIMAL** - Simple bugs, small improvements
|
|
190
|
-
```markdown
|
|
191
|
-
## Problem
|
|
192
|
-
[Brief description]
|
|
193
|
-
|
|
194
|
-
## Solution
|
|
195
|
-
[Approach]
|
|
196
|
-
|
|
197
|
-
## Acceptance Criteria
|
|
198
|
-
- [ ] Requirement 1
|
|
199
|
-
- [ ] Requirement 2
|
|
200
|
-
```
|
|
201
|
-
|
|
202
|
-
**📋 STANDARD** - Most features
|
|
203
|
-
```markdown
|
|
204
|
-
## Overview
|
|
205
|
-
[Comprehensive description]
|
|
206
|
-
|
|
207
|
-
## Problem Statement
|
|
208
|
-
[Why this matters]
|
|
209
|
-
|
|
210
|
-
## Proposed Solution
|
|
211
|
-
[Technical approach with code examples]
|
|
212
|
-
|
|
213
|
-
## Acceptance Criteria
|
|
214
|
-
- [ ] Detailed requirements
|
|
215
|
-
|
|
216
|
-
## Technical Considerations
|
|
217
|
-
- Dependencies
|
|
218
|
-
- Risks
|
|
219
|
-
- Alternatives considered
|
|
220
|
-
|
|
221
|
-
## References
|
|
222
|
-
- [Links to research]
|
|
223
|
-
```
|
|
224
|
-
|
|
225
|
-
**📚 DETAILED** - Complex features, architectural changes
|
|
226
|
-
All of STANDARD plus:
|
|
227
|
-
- Implementation phases
|
|
228
|
-
- Rollback strategy
|
|
229
|
-
- Migration plan
|
|
230
|
-
- Testing strategy
|
|
231
|
-
- Monitoring requirements
|
|
232
|
-
|
|
233
|
-
### Step 5.5: Register Architectural Decisions
|
|
234
|
-
|
|
235
|
-
> [!IMPORTANT]
|
|
236
|
-
> If your plan makes long-term architectural choices (library swaps, schema changes,
|
|
237
|
-
> pattern adoptions), create ADRs to persist them.
|
|
238
|
-
|
|
239
|
-
**Triggers for ADR creation:**
|
|
240
|
-
- Choosing between competing technologies/libraries
|
|
241
|
-
- Defining new patterns or conventions
|
|
242
|
-
- Making breaking changes with long-term impact
|
|
243
|
-
- Decisions that future developers need to understand "why"
|
|
244
|
-
|
|
245
|
-
**If architectural decision made:**
|
|
246
|
-
```bash
|
|
247
|
-
# Get next ADR ID
|
|
248
|
-
next_id=$(printf "%03d" $(( $(ls -1 docs/decisions/*.md 2>/dev/null | xargs -n1 basename | grep -E '^[0-9]{3}-' | wc -l) + 1 )))
|
|
249
|
-
cp docs/decisions/adr-template.md docs/decisions/${next_id}-{decision-slug}.md
|
|
250
|
-
```
|
|
251
|
-
|
|
252
|
-
**Link in plan:**
|
|
253
|
-
Add `## Architectural Decisions: ADR-{NNN}` section referencing the new ADR.
|
|
254
|
-
|
|
255
|
-
### Step 5.9: Create Plan Document
|
|
256
|
-
|
|
257
|
-
Create plan file: `plans/{feature-name}.md`
|
|
258
|
-
|
|
259
|
-
**Structure:**
|
|
260
|
-
```markdown
|
|
261
|
-
# {Feature Title}
|
|
262
|
-
|
|
263
|
-
> Created: {DATE}
|
|
264
|
-
> Status: Draft
|
|
265
|
-
|
|
266
|
-
## Summary
|
|
267
|
-
[One-paragraph overview]
|
|
268
|
-
|
|
269
|
-
## Problem Statement
|
|
270
|
-
[What problem this solves]
|
|
271
|
-
|
|
272
|
-
## Research Findings
|
|
273
|
-
|
|
274
|
-
### Codebase Patterns
|
|
275
|
-
[Relevant existing code with file:line references]
|
|
276
|
-
|
|
277
|
-
### Best Practices
|
|
278
|
-
[External research findings]
|
|
279
|
-
|
|
280
|
-
## Proposed Solution
|
|
281
|
-
|
|
282
|
-
### Approach
|
|
283
|
-
[Technical approach]
|
|
284
|
-
|
|
285
|
-
### Code Examples
|
|
286
|
-
\`\`\`{language}
|
|
287
|
-
// Example implementation
|
|
288
|
-
\`\`\`
|
|
289
|
-
|
|
290
|
-
## Acceptance Criteria
|
|
291
|
-
- [ ] Criterion 1
|
|
292
|
-
- [ ] Criterion 2
|
|
293
|
-
|
|
294
|
-
## Acceptance Criteria & Testing (Nyquist Validation Layer)
|
|
295
|
-
> **Important:** Map each requirement to a specific automated test or manual verification command *before* execution.
|
|
296
|
-
- [ ] Criterion 1 -> `npm test -- -t "criterion 1"`
|
|
297
|
-
- [ ] Criterion 2 -> `pytest -k "criterion_2"`
|
|
298
|
-
- [ ] Test scaffolding required: [List tests that need to be created]
|
|
299
|
-
|
|
300
|
-
## Technical Considerations
|
|
301
|
-
|
|
302
|
-
### Dependencies
|
|
303
|
-
- [Required packages/services]
|
|
304
|
-
|
|
305
|
-
### Risks
|
|
306
|
-
- [Potential issues]
|
|
307
|
-
|
|
308
|
-
### Alternatives Considered
|
|
309
|
-
- [Other approaches and why rejected]
|
|
310
|
-
|
|
311
|
-
## Implementation Steps
|
|
312
|
-
|
|
313
|
-
Tasks tracked in [03-tasks.md](../03-tasks.md#phase-{N}).
|
|
314
|
-
|
|
315
|
-
**Approach:**
|
|
316
|
-
- Task 1: [Technical details]
|
|
317
|
-
- Task 2: [Technical details]
|
|
318
|
-
|
|
319
|
-
## References
|
|
320
|
-
- [Research links]
|
|
321
|
-
- [Related issues]
|
|
322
|
-
```
|
|
323
|
-
|
|
324
|
-
### Step 6: Create Plans Directory (if needed)
|
|
325
|
-
|
|
326
|
-
```bash
|
|
327
|
-
mkdir -p plans
|
|
328
|
-
```
|
|
329
|
-
|
|
330
|
-
### Step 7: Offer Next Steps
|
|
331
|
-
|
|
332
|
-
```
|
|
333
|
-
✓ Plan created: plans/{feature-name}.md
|
|
334
|
-
|
|
335
|
-
What's next?
|
|
336
|
-
1. Start work - Execute this plan with /work
|
|
337
|
-
2. Review plan - Get feedback before starting
|
|
338
|
-
3. Refine plan - Add more detail
|
|
339
|
-
4. Nothing for now
|
|
340
|
-
```
|
|
341
|
-
|
|
342
|
-
### Step 8: Create Todos for Deferred Scope
|
|
343
|
-
|
|
344
|
-
> [!IMPORTANT]
|
|
345
|
-
> If the plan identifies "out of scope" or "future work" items, create todo files for them NOW.
|
|
346
|
-
|
|
347
|
-
**Check for deferred items:**
|
|
348
|
-
- [ ] Did you mark anything as "out of scope"?
|
|
349
|
-
- [ ] Are there "nice to have" features for later?
|
|
350
|
-
- [ ] Did research reveal related improvements?
|
|
351
|
-
|
|
352
|
-
**If YES:**
|
|
353
|
-
```bash
|
|
354
|
-
# Create todo for each deferred item
|
|
355
|
-
Call MCP `call_tool_todo_manager` { action: "create", priority: "p3", title: "{description}", description: "TODO description" }
|
|
356
|
-
"Deferred item from plan {feature-name}. This feature was identified as valuable but out of scope for the initial implementation." \
|
|
357
|
-
"Implement feature" "Verify functionality"
|
|
358
|
-
```
|
|
359
|
-
|
|
360
|
-
**Before adding plan references to the todo:**
|
|
361
|
-
|
|
362
|
-
> [!CAUTION]
|
|
363
|
-
> Verify referential integrity to prevent dead links.
|
|
364
|
-
|
|
365
|
-
**If referencing this plan in the todo:**
|
|
366
|
-
```bash
|
|
367
|
-
# Verify the plan file exists
|
|
368
|
-
if [ ! -f "plans/{feature-name}.md" ]; then
|
|
369
|
-
echo "❌ ERROR: Plan file does not exist. Cannot create reference."
|
|
370
|
-
exit 1
|
|
371
|
-
fi
|
|
372
|
-
```
|
|
373
|
-
|
|
374
|
-
**Alternative references** (if plan was not persisted):
|
|
375
|
-
- Specs: `../docs/specs/{name}/README.md`
|
|
376
|
-
- Solutions: `../docs/solutions/{category}/{solution-name}.md`
|
|
377
|
-
- ADRs: `../docs/decisions/{nnn}-{decision}.md`
|
|
378
|
-
|
|
379
|
-
**See also:** `skills/file-todos/SKILL.md` for full todo management workflows.
|
|
380
|
-
|
|
381
|
-
---
|
|
382
|
-
|
|
383
|
-
### Phase 5: Completion & Handoff
|
|
384
|
-
|
|
385
|
-
#### Step 1: Establish Terminal UI State
|
|
386
|
-
|
|
387
|
-
> [!IMPORTANT]
|
|
388
|
-
> **Visual Completion Signal**
|
|
389
|
-
> Call `task_boundary` one last time to signal completion in the user's UI. This prevents the "task" from appearing active after you've finished.
|
|
390
|
-
|
|
391
|
-
```javascript
|
|
392
|
-
await task_boundary({
|
|
393
|
-
TaskName: "[COMPLETED] Planning: {Feature Name}",
|
|
394
|
-
TaskStatus: "Plan created and ready for review or execution.",
|
|
395
|
-
Mode: "VERIFICATION",
|
|
396
|
-
TaskSummary: "Completed planning for {feature}. Created comprehensive plan with acceptance criteria, research findings, and implementation steps."
|
|
397
|
-
});
|
|
398
|
-
```
|
|
399
|
-
|
|
400
|
-
#### Step 2: Mandatory Handoff
|
|
401
|
-
|
|
402
|
-
> [!IMPORTANT]
|
|
403
|
-
> **Exit Transition**
|
|
404
|
-
> Do not stop here. Offer the user clear paths to the next logical workflow.
|
|
405
|
-
|
|
406
|
-
```bash
|
|
407
|
-
✓ Plan created: plans/{feature-name}.md
|
|
408
|
-
|
|
409
|
-
Next steps:
|
|
410
|
-
1. /plan_review - Get feedback on plan quality before execution
|
|
411
|
-
2. /work - Start implementing (if plan is simple and you're confident)
|
|
412
|
-
3. Refine plan - Add more detail based on additional research
|
|
413
|
-
4. Create todos - For any deferred scope identified
|
|
414
|
-
```
|
|
415
|
-
|
|
416
|
-
---
|
|
417
|
-
|
|
418
|
-
## Quality Guidelines
|
|
419
|
-
|
|
420
|
-
**Good plans have:**
|
|
421
|
-
- ✅ Clear problem statement (not just "what" but "why")
|
|
422
|
-
- ✅ Research with specific file references
|
|
423
|
-
- ✅ Concrete acceptance criteria (testable)
|
|
424
|
-
- ✅ Code examples following existing patterns
|
|
425
|
-
- ✅ Considered alternatives
|
|
426
|
-
|
|
427
|
-
**Avoid:**
|
|
428
|
-
- ❌ Vague requirements ("make it better")
|
|
429
|
-
- ❌ No research ("just do X")
|
|
430
|
-
- ❌ Missing acceptance criteria
|
|
431
|
-
- ❌ Ignoring existing patterns
|
|
432
|
-
|
|
433
|
-
---
|
|
434
|
-
|
|
435
|
-
## References
|
|
436
|
-
|
|
437
|
-
- Plans directory: `plans/`
|
|
438
|
-
- Execute plans: `/work`
|
|
439
|
-
- Triage deferred items: `/triage`
|
|
1
|
+
---
|
|
2
|
+
description: (Compound) Transform feature descriptions into well-structured project plans with solution search and pattern checks.
|
|
3
|
+
---
|
|
4
|
+
|
|
5
|
+
# /plan-compound - Research and Plan Before Building
|
|
6
|
+
|
|
7
|
+
Transform feature descriptions, bug reports, or improvement ideas into well-structured plans that follow project conventions and best practices.
|
|
8
|
+
|
|
9
|
+
> **Why plan first?** Research before coding prevents building the wrong thing. A 30-minute plan saves hours of rework.
|
|
10
|
+
>
|
|
11
|
+
> **Note:** This is the Compound version with solution search and pattern checks. For quick planning, use `/plan`.
|
|
12
|
+
|
|
13
|
+
|
|
14
|
+
## When To Use
|
|
15
|
+
|
|
16
|
+
- Before any feature taking >2 hours
|
|
17
|
+
- For bugs requiring investigation
|
|
18
|
+
- When exploring unfamiliar codebase areas
|
|
19
|
+
- Before architectural changes
|
|
20
|
+
|
|
21
|
+
---
|
|
22
|
+
|
|
23
|
+
## Workflow
|
|
24
|
+
|
|
25
|
+
### Step 0: Search Existing Solutions (MANDATORY)
|
|
26
|
+
|
|
27
|
+
> [!CAUTION]
|
|
28
|
+
> **BLOCKING STEP.** You MUST complete this before proceeding. Skipping wastes time re-solving known problems.
|
|
29
|
+
|
|
30
|
+
**Run the auto-searcher:**
|
|
31
|
+
```bash
|
|
32
|
+
// turbo
|
|
33
|
+
Call MCP `call_tool_logger_manager` { action: "logWorkflow", name: "/plan", outcome: "success" }
|
|
34
|
+
Call MCP `call_tool_compound_manager` { action: "search", terms: [ "{keyword1}" "{keyword2}"] }
|
|
35
|
+
```
|
|
36
|
+
|
|
37
|
+
**See also:** `skills/compound-docs/SKILL.md` for advanced searching and pattern promotion.
|
|
38
|
+
|
|
39
|
+
**Output required:**
|
|
40
|
+
Copy the **table** AND the **update command** from the script output into your plan.
|
|
41
|
+
|
|
42
|
+
**If relevant solutions found:**
|
|
43
|
+
1. List them in the plan under "## Prior Solutions"
|
|
44
|
+
2. Execute the update command to track usage:
|
|
45
|
+
```bash
|
|
46
|
+
// turbo
|
|
47
|
+
Call MCP `call_tool_compound_manager` { action: "updateRef", files: ["{paths from search output}"] }
|
|
48
|
+
```
|
|
49
|
+
|
|
50
|
+
---
|
|
51
|
+
|
|
52
|
+
#### ⛔ VALIDATION CHECKPOINT
|
|
53
|
+
|
|
54
|
+
Before proceeding to Step 0.5, confirm:
|
|
55
|
+
|
|
56
|
+
- [ ] Ran MCP `call_tool_compound_manager` { action: "search" } with relevant keywords?
|
|
57
|
+
- [ ] Reviewed all matching solutions (or confirmed none found)?
|
|
58
|
+
- [ ] Ran MCP `call_tool_compound_manager` { action: "updateRef" } if reusing any solution?
|
|
59
|
+
|
|
60
|
+
**If any box is unchecked:** Complete it now. Do NOT proceed.
|
|
61
|
+
|
|
62
|
+
---
|
|
63
|
+
|
|
64
|
+
### Step 0.5: Check Active Specs
|
|
65
|
+
|
|
66
|
+
Before creating a standalone plan, check if this work belongs to an active spec:
|
|
67
|
+
|
|
68
|
+
```bash
|
|
69
|
+
ls docs/specs/*/README.md 2>/dev/null | grep -v templates
|
|
70
|
+
```
|
|
71
|
+
|
|
72
|
+
**If active spec found:**
|
|
73
|
+
1. Read `docs/specs/{name}/00-START-HERE.md` for context
|
|
74
|
+
2. Determine if this plan belongs to the spec
|
|
75
|
+
3. If yes, create plan in `docs/specs/{name}/plans/{phase}-{description}.md`
|
|
76
|
+
4. Link to parent spec in plan header
|
|
77
|
+
5. Reference current phase from spec's `03-tasks.md`
|
|
78
|
+
|
|
79
|
+
**If no active spec (or work is unrelated):** Proceed with standalone plan in `plans/`.
|
|
80
|
+
|
|
81
|
+
> [!TIP]
|
|
82
|
+
> Use `/specs` first if this is multi-week work that should have its own specification.
|
|
83
|
+
|
|
84
|
+
### Step 0.6: Pattern Awareness (MANDATORY)
|
|
85
|
+
|
|
86
|
+
> [!CAUTION]
|
|
87
|
+
> **BLOCKING STEP.** Before creating your plan, review the critical patterns to avoid reinventing solutions to known problems.
|
|
88
|
+
|
|
89
|
+
```bash
|
|
90
|
+
# Quick review of critical patterns
|
|
91
|
+
cat docs/solutions/patterns/critical-patterns.md | grep "^### Pattern"
|
|
92
|
+
```
|
|
93
|
+
|
|
94
|
+
**Key patterns to consider during planning:**
|
|
95
|
+
- Pattern #9: Rigorous Planning (Multi-Order Thinking)
|
|
96
|
+
- Pattern #10: Atomic State Transitions
|
|
97
|
+
- Pattern #3: Actionable Items → Todo Files
|
|
98
|
+
|
|
99
|
+
**Why this matters:** These patterns exist because the same mistakes were made 3+ times. Consulting them now prevents wasted effort.
|
|
100
|
+
|
|
101
|
+
---
|
|
102
|
+
|
|
103
|
+
### Step 1: Clarify Requirements
|
|
104
|
+
|
|
105
|
+
If the request is vague, ask clarifying questions:
|
|
106
|
+
|
|
107
|
+
```
|
|
108
|
+
Before I create a plan, I have some questions:
|
|
109
|
+
|
|
110
|
+
1. What problem does this solve for users?
|
|
111
|
+
2. Are there any constraints (timeline, tech stack, etc.)?
|
|
112
|
+
3. Should this integrate with existing features?
|
|
113
|
+
```
|
|
114
|
+
|
|
115
|
+
**Do not proceed until requirements are clear.**
|
|
116
|
+
|
|
117
|
+
### Step 2: Research Phase
|
|
118
|
+
|
|
119
|
+
Gather context from multiple sources in parallel:
|
|
120
|
+
|
|
121
|
+
**Codebase Research:**
|
|
122
|
+
- [ ] Find similar implementations in the codebase
|
|
123
|
+
- [ ] Identify relevant files and patterns
|
|
124
|
+
- [ ] Check for existing utilities/helpers to reuse
|
|
125
|
+
- [ ] Review related tests for expected behavior
|
|
126
|
+
|
|
127
|
+
**Documentation Research:**
|
|
128
|
+
- [ ] Check project README, CLAUDE.md, or GEMINI.md
|
|
129
|
+
- [ ] Review any existing docs for the feature area
|
|
130
|
+
- [ ] Look for team conventions and standards
|
|
131
|
+
|
|
132
|
+
**External Research:**
|
|
133
|
+
- [ ] Find best practices for this type of feature
|
|
134
|
+
- [ ] Check framework documentation for recommended approaches
|
|
135
|
+
- [ ] Look for common pitfalls to avoid
|
|
136
|
+
|
|
137
|
+
**Reference Collection:**
|
|
138
|
+
Document all findings with specific references:
|
|
139
|
+
- File paths: `src/services/auth.ts:42`
|
|
140
|
+
- URLs: `https://docs.example.com/auth`
|
|
141
|
+
- Issues: `#123`, `#456`
|
|
142
|
+
|
|
143
|
+
### Step 3: Analyze and Identify Gaps
|
|
144
|
+
|
|
145
|
+
Review collected research for:
|
|
146
|
+
|
|
147
|
+
- [ ] Edge cases not covered
|
|
148
|
+
- [ ] Potential conflicts with existing code
|
|
149
|
+
- [ ] Missing dependencies
|
|
150
|
+
- [ ] Security considerations
|
|
151
|
+
- [ ] Performance implications
|
|
152
|
+
|
|
153
|
+
### Step 3.5: Deep Analysis (Think Hard)
|
|
154
|
+
|
|
155
|
+
> [!IMPORTANT]
|
|
156
|
+
> Don't rush to solutions. Invest time in rigorous analysis now to avoid costly surprises later.
|
|
157
|
+
|
|
158
|
+
**Multi-Order Thinking:**
|
|
159
|
+
- [ ] **1st order:** What does this change directly affect?
|
|
160
|
+
- [ ] **2nd order:** What depends on those affected things?
|
|
161
|
+
- [ ] **3rd order:** What cascading effects could occur?
|
|
162
|
+
- [ ] **4th order:** Could this affect unrelated systems through shared dependencies?
|
|
163
|
+
|
|
164
|
+
**Long-Term Implications:**
|
|
165
|
+
- [ ] How will this age in 6 months? 1 year?
|
|
166
|
+
- [ ] Does this create technical debt or reduce it?
|
|
167
|
+
- [ ] Is this approach reversible if we're wrong?
|
|
168
|
+
- [ ] Will future maintainers understand the "why"?
|
|
169
|
+
|
|
170
|
+
**Edge Cases (Leave No Stone Unturned):**
|
|
171
|
+
- [ ] Empty/null/undefined inputs
|
|
172
|
+
- [ ] Boundary conditions (min, max, exactly-at-limit)
|
|
173
|
+
- [ ] Concurrent/race conditions
|
|
174
|
+
- [ ] Failure modes (network, database, external services)
|
|
175
|
+
- [ ] User behavior extremes (fast clicking, back button, refresh)
|
|
176
|
+
- [ ] Data migration scenarios
|
|
177
|
+
- [ ] Rollback scenarios
|
|
178
|
+
|
|
179
|
+
**Stakeholder Impact Analysis:**
|
|
180
|
+
- [ ] **End Users:** Will this change behavior they rely on? UX disruption?
|
|
181
|
+
- [ ] **Other Developers:** Breaking API changes? Documentation needs?
|
|
182
|
+
- [ ] **Operations/Support:** New failure modes? Monitoring/alerting updates?
|
|
183
|
+
- [ ] **Downstream Systems:** Integrations affected? Consumer contracts broken?
|
|
184
|
+
- [ ] **Business Stakeholders:** Timeline/scope implications? Resource needs?
|
|
185
|
+
- [ ] **Security/Compliance:** Data handling changes? Audit requirements?
|
|
186
|
+
|
|
187
|
+
### Step 4: Choose Detail Level
|
|
188
|
+
|
|
189
|
+
**📄 MINIMAL** - Simple bugs, small improvements
|
|
190
|
+
```markdown
|
|
191
|
+
## Problem
|
|
192
|
+
[Brief description]
|
|
193
|
+
|
|
194
|
+
## Solution
|
|
195
|
+
[Approach]
|
|
196
|
+
|
|
197
|
+
## Acceptance Criteria
|
|
198
|
+
- [ ] Requirement 1
|
|
199
|
+
- [ ] Requirement 2
|
|
200
|
+
```
|
|
201
|
+
|
|
202
|
+
**📋 STANDARD** - Most features
|
|
203
|
+
```markdown
|
|
204
|
+
## Overview
|
|
205
|
+
[Comprehensive description]
|
|
206
|
+
|
|
207
|
+
## Problem Statement
|
|
208
|
+
[Why this matters]
|
|
209
|
+
|
|
210
|
+
## Proposed Solution
|
|
211
|
+
[Technical approach with code examples]
|
|
212
|
+
|
|
213
|
+
## Acceptance Criteria
|
|
214
|
+
- [ ] Detailed requirements
|
|
215
|
+
|
|
216
|
+
## Technical Considerations
|
|
217
|
+
- Dependencies
|
|
218
|
+
- Risks
|
|
219
|
+
- Alternatives considered
|
|
220
|
+
|
|
221
|
+
## References
|
|
222
|
+
- [Links to research]
|
|
223
|
+
```
|
|
224
|
+
|
|
225
|
+
**📚 DETAILED** - Complex features, architectural changes
|
|
226
|
+
All of STANDARD plus:
|
|
227
|
+
- Implementation phases
|
|
228
|
+
- Rollback strategy
|
|
229
|
+
- Migration plan
|
|
230
|
+
- Testing strategy
|
|
231
|
+
- Monitoring requirements
|
|
232
|
+
|
|
233
|
+
### Step 5.5: Register Architectural Decisions
|
|
234
|
+
|
|
235
|
+
> [!IMPORTANT]
|
|
236
|
+
> If your plan makes long-term architectural choices (library swaps, schema changes,
|
|
237
|
+
> pattern adoptions), create ADRs to persist them.
|
|
238
|
+
|
|
239
|
+
**Triggers for ADR creation:**
|
|
240
|
+
- Choosing between competing technologies/libraries
|
|
241
|
+
- Defining new patterns or conventions
|
|
242
|
+
- Making breaking changes with long-term impact
|
|
243
|
+
- Decisions that future developers need to understand "why"
|
|
244
|
+
|
|
245
|
+
**If architectural decision made:**
|
|
246
|
+
```bash
|
|
247
|
+
# Get next ADR ID
|
|
248
|
+
next_id=$(printf "%03d" $(( $(ls -1 docs/decisions/*.md 2>/dev/null | xargs -n1 basename | grep -E '^[0-9]{3}-' | wc -l) + 1 )))
|
|
249
|
+
cp docs/decisions/adr-template.md docs/decisions/${next_id}-{decision-slug}.md
|
|
250
|
+
```
|
|
251
|
+
|
|
252
|
+
**Link in plan:**
|
|
253
|
+
Add `## Architectural Decisions: ADR-{NNN}` section referencing the new ADR.
|
|
254
|
+
|
|
255
|
+
### Step 5.9: Create Plan Document
|
|
256
|
+
|
|
257
|
+
Create plan file: `plans/{feature-name}.md`
|
|
258
|
+
|
|
259
|
+
**Structure:**
|
|
260
|
+
```markdown
|
|
261
|
+
# {Feature Title}
|
|
262
|
+
|
|
263
|
+
> Created: {DATE}
|
|
264
|
+
> Status: Draft
|
|
265
|
+
|
|
266
|
+
## Summary
|
|
267
|
+
[One-paragraph overview]
|
|
268
|
+
|
|
269
|
+
## Problem Statement
|
|
270
|
+
[What problem this solves]
|
|
271
|
+
|
|
272
|
+
## Research Findings
|
|
273
|
+
|
|
274
|
+
### Codebase Patterns
|
|
275
|
+
[Relevant existing code with file:line references]
|
|
276
|
+
|
|
277
|
+
### Best Practices
|
|
278
|
+
[External research findings]
|
|
279
|
+
|
|
280
|
+
## Proposed Solution
|
|
281
|
+
|
|
282
|
+
### Approach
|
|
283
|
+
[Technical approach]
|
|
284
|
+
|
|
285
|
+
### Code Examples
|
|
286
|
+
\`\`\`{language}
|
|
287
|
+
// Example implementation
|
|
288
|
+
\`\`\`
|
|
289
|
+
|
|
290
|
+
## Acceptance Criteria
|
|
291
|
+
- [ ] Criterion 1
|
|
292
|
+
- [ ] Criterion 2
|
|
293
|
+
|
|
294
|
+
## Acceptance Criteria & Testing (Nyquist Validation Layer)
|
|
295
|
+
> **Important:** Map each requirement to a specific automated test or manual verification command *before* execution.
|
|
296
|
+
- [ ] Criterion 1 -> `npm test -- -t "criterion 1"`
|
|
297
|
+
- [ ] Criterion 2 -> `pytest -k "criterion_2"`
|
|
298
|
+
- [ ] Test scaffolding required: [List tests that need to be created]
|
|
299
|
+
|
|
300
|
+
## Technical Considerations
|
|
301
|
+
|
|
302
|
+
### Dependencies
|
|
303
|
+
- [Required packages/services]
|
|
304
|
+
|
|
305
|
+
### Risks
|
|
306
|
+
- [Potential issues]
|
|
307
|
+
|
|
308
|
+
### Alternatives Considered
|
|
309
|
+
- [Other approaches and why rejected]
|
|
310
|
+
|
|
311
|
+
## Implementation Steps
|
|
312
|
+
|
|
313
|
+
Tasks tracked in [03-tasks.md](../03-tasks.md#phase-{N}).
|
|
314
|
+
|
|
315
|
+
**Approach:**
|
|
316
|
+
- Task 1: [Technical details]
|
|
317
|
+
- Task 2: [Technical details]
|
|
318
|
+
|
|
319
|
+
## References
|
|
320
|
+
- [Research links]
|
|
321
|
+
- [Related issues]
|
|
322
|
+
```
|
|
323
|
+
|
|
324
|
+
### Step 6: Create Plans Directory (if needed)
|
|
325
|
+
|
|
326
|
+
```bash
|
|
327
|
+
mkdir -p plans
|
|
328
|
+
```
|
|
329
|
+
|
|
330
|
+
### Step 7: Offer Next Steps
|
|
331
|
+
|
|
332
|
+
```
|
|
333
|
+
✓ Plan created: plans/{feature-name}.md
|
|
334
|
+
|
|
335
|
+
What's next?
|
|
336
|
+
1. Start work - Execute this plan with /work
|
|
337
|
+
2. Review plan - Get feedback before starting
|
|
338
|
+
3. Refine plan - Add more detail
|
|
339
|
+
4. Nothing for now
|
|
340
|
+
```
|
|
341
|
+
|
|
342
|
+
### Step 8: Create Todos for Deferred Scope
|
|
343
|
+
|
|
344
|
+
> [!IMPORTANT]
|
|
345
|
+
> If the plan identifies "out of scope" or "future work" items, create todo files for them NOW.
|
|
346
|
+
|
|
347
|
+
**Check for deferred items:**
|
|
348
|
+
- [ ] Did you mark anything as "out of scope"?
|
|
349
|
+
- [ ] Are there "nice to have" features for later?
|
|
350
|
+
- [ ] Did research reveal related improvements?
|
|
351
|
+
|
|
352
|
+
**If YES:**
|
|
353
|
+
```bash
|
|
354
|
+
# Create todo for each deferred item
|
|
355
|
+
Call MCP `call_tool_todo_manager` { action: "create", priority: "p3", title: "{description}", description: "TODO description" }
|
|
356
|
+
"Deferred item from plan {feature-name}. This feature was identified as valuable but out of scope for the initial implementation." \
|
|
357
|
+
"Implement feature" "Verify functionality"
|
|
358
|
+
```
|
|
359
|
+
|
|
360
|
+
**Before adding plan references to the todo:**
|
|
361
|
+
|
|
362
|
+
> [!CAUTION]
|
|
363
|
+
> Verify referential integrity to prevent dead links.
|
|
364
|
+
|
|
365
|
+
**If referencing this plan in the todo:**
|
|
366
|
+
```bash
|
|
367
|
+
# Verify the plan file exists
|
|
368
|
+
if [ ! -f "plans/{feature-name}.md" ]; then
|
|
369
|
+
echo "❌ ERROR: Plan file does not exist. Cannot create reference."
|
|
370
|
+
exit 1
|
|
371
|
+
fi
|
|
372
|
+
```
|
|
373
|
+
|
|
374
|
+
**Alternative references** (if plan was not persisted):
|
|
375
|
+
- Specs: `../docs/specs/{name}/README.md`
|
|
376
|
+
- Solutions: `../docs/solutions/{category}/{solution-name}.md`
|
|
377
|
+
- ADRs: `../docs/decisions/{nnn}-{decision}.md`
|
|
378
|
+
|
|
379
|
+
**See also:** `skills/file-todos/SKILL.md` for full todo management workflows.
|
|
380
|
+
|
|
381
|
+
---
|
|
382
|
+
|
|
383
|
+
### Phase 5: Completion & Handoff
|
|
384
|
+
|
|
385
|
+
#### Step 1: Establish Terminal UI State
|
|
386
|
+
|
|
387
|
+
> [!IMPORTANT]
|
|
388
|
+
> **Visual Completion Signal**
|
|
389
|
+
> Call `task_boundary` one last time to signal completion in the user's UI. This prevents the "task" from appearing active after you've finished.
|
|
390
|
+
|
|
391
|
+
```javascript
|
|
392
|
+
await task_boundary({
|
|
393
|
+
TaskName: "[COMPLETED] Planning: {Feature Name}",
|
|
394
|
+
TaskStatus: "Plan created and ready for review or execution.",
|
|
395
|
+
Mode: "VERIFICATION",
|
|
396
|
+
TaskSummary: "Completed planning for {feature}. Created comprehensive plan with acceptance criteria, research findings, and implementation steps."
|
|
397
|
+
});
|
|
398
|
+
```
|
|
399
|
+
|
|
400
|
+
#### Step 2: Mandatory Handoff
|
|
401
|
+
|
|
402
|
+
> [!IMPORTANT]
|
|
403
|
+
> **Exit Transition**
|
|
404
|
+
> Do not stop here. Offer the user clear paths to the next logical workflow.
|
|
405
|
+
|
|
406
|
+
```bash
|
|
407
|
+
✓ Plan created: plans/{feature-name}.md
|
|
408
|
+
|
|
409
|
+
Next steps:
|
|
410
|
+
1. /plan_review - Get feedback on plan quality before execution
|
|
411
|
+
2. /work - Start implementing (if plan is simple and you're confident)
|
|
412
|
+
3. Refine plan - Add more detail based on additional research
|
|
413
|
+
4. Create todos - For any deferred scope identified
|
|
414
|
+
```
|
|
415
|
+
|
|
416
|
+
---
|
|
417
|
+
|
|
418
|
+
## Quality Guidelines
|
|
419
|
+
|
|
420
|
+
**Good plans have:**
|
|
421
|
+
- ✅ Clear problem statement (not just "what" but "why")
|
|
422
|
+
- ✅ Research with specific file references
|
|
423
|
+
- ✅ Concrete acceptance criteria (testable)
|
|
424
|
+
- ✅ Code examples following existing patterns
|
|
425
|
+
- ✅ Considered alternatives
|
|
426
|
+
|
|
427
|
+
**Avoid:**
|
|
428
|
+
- ❌ Vague requirements ("make it better")
|
|
429
|
+
- ❌ No research ("just do X")
|
|
430
|
+
- ❌ Missing acceptance criteria
|
|
431
|
+
- ❌ Ignoring existing patterns
|
|
432
|
+
|
|
433
|
+
---
|
|
434
|
+
|
|
435
|
+
## References
|
|
436
|
+
|
|
437
|
+
- Plans directory: `plans/`
|
|
438
|
+
- Execute plans: `/work`
|
|
439
|
+
- Triage deferred items: `/triage`
|