بنقرة واحدة
writing-plans
Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
القائمة
Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Use before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies
Use when working with Docker containers — debugging container failures, writing Dockerfiles, docker-compose for integration tests, image optimization, or deploying containerized applications
Use when you have a written implementation plan to execute in a separate session with review checkpoints
Use when you need parallel, read-only exploration with the agent tool (Scout fan-out)
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes
| name | writing-plans |
| description | Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code |
Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for our codebase and questionable taste. Document everything they need to know: which files to touch for each task, code, testing, docs they might need to check, how to test it. Give them the whole plan as bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.
Assume they are a skilled developer, but know almost nothing about our toolset or problem domain. Assume they don't know good test design very well.
Announce at start: "I'm using the writing-plans skill to create the implementation plan."
Context: Planning is read-only. Use hive_feature_create + hive_plan_write + hive_context_write and avoid worktrees during planning.
Save plans to: hive_plan_write (writes to .hive/features/<feature>/plan.md)
Maintain context with: hive_context_write({ name: "learnings", content: ... }) or another focused context name when durable notes would help future workers
Each step is one action (2-5 minutes):
Every plan MUST follow this structure:
# [Feature Name]
## Discovery
### Original Request
- "{User's exact words}"
### Interview Summary
- {Point}: {Decision}
### Research Findings
- `{file:lines}`: {Finding}
---
## Non-Goals (What we're NOT building)
- {Explicit exclusion}
---
## Design Summary
{Concise human-facing summary of the feature before task details. Optional Mermaid is allowed here for dependency or sequence overview only.}
---
## Tasks
### 1. Task Name
Use the Task Structure template below for every task.
The Depends on annotation declares task execution order:
Always include Depends on for each task. Use none to enable parallel starts.
### N. Task Name
**Depends on**: none
**Files:**
- Create: `exact/path/to/file.py`
- Modify: `exact/path/to/existing.py:123-145`
- Test: `tests/exact/path/to/test.py`
**What to do**:
- Step 1: Write the failing test
```python
def test_specific_behavior():
result = function(input)
assert result == expected
```
- Step 2: Run test to verify it fails
- Run: `pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v`
- Expected: FAIL with "function not defined"
- Step 3: Write minimal implementation
```python
def function(input):
return expected
```
- Step 4: Run test to verify it passes
- Run: `pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v`
- Expected: PASS
- Step 5: Commit
```bash
git add tests/path/test.py src/path/file.py
git commit -m "feat: add specific feature"
```
**Must NOT do**:
- {Task guardrail}
**References**:
- `{file:lines}` — {Why this reference matters}
**Verify**:
- [ ] Run: `{command}` → {expected}
- [ ] {Additional acceptance criteria}
All verification MUST be agent-executable (no human intervention):
✅ `bun test` → all pass
✅ `curl -X POST /api/x` → 201
❌ "User manually tests..."
❌ "Visually confirm..."
context/overview.md as the human-facing review surfaceplan.md remains execution truth## TasksDesign Summary in plan.md should stay readable and review-friendly even though overview-first review happens in context/overview.mdplan.md fileAfter saving the plan, ask whether to consult Hygienic (Consultant/Reviewer/Debugger) before offering execution choice.
Plan complete and saved to .hive/features/<feature>/plan.md.
Two execution options:
Which approach?
If Subagent-Driven chosen:
If Parallel Session chosen: