architecture-plan

name

architecture-plan

description

Turn approved architecture-design artifacts, with supporting review findings when present, into an incremental implementation/refactoring plan. Use when asked to plan a refactor, sequence remediation, or implement an approved target architecture. Produces a task-runner-compatible, verifiable plan that cites source findings, evidence, design decisions, contracts, or risks. NOT for applying changes (hand off to a mutator agent), designing target architecture (use architecture-design), or scoring (use architecture-scorecard).

Architecture plan

Derive an actionable, incremental implementation/refactoring plan from an approved design, with review findings as supporting context when present. The artifact is executable by an engineer, mutator agent, or task runner; the architect writes the plan and stops.

When to use

Use after an architecture design, when the user wants approved target architecture implemented. For existing-code remediation, the default chain is architecture-review → architecture-design → architecture-plan. Plan one hotspot, boundary, module, or flow per plan unless a roadmap is explicitly requested.

If there is no approved design artifact, recommend architecture-design first. If there is no review report for existing-code remediation, recommend architecture-review before design unless the user explicitly wants greenfield target-state design.

Skill navigation

• Missing findings for an existing system: recommend architecture-review first unless the user already supplied enough current evidence.
• Missing approved target architecture: recommend architecture-design before planning.
• Current skill: use architecture-plan to sequence small, verifiable changes from an approved design, citing review findings as supporting rationale when present.
• Next skill after implementation: run architecture-review to verify the code now matches intended architecture and the plan's acceptance criteria.

Task list discipline

Maintain a visible task list for the planning flow. Track at least:

1. Approved design artifact confirmed; supporting review report confirmed when present.
2. Scope and first execution horizon selected.
3. Safety net ordered before behavior-bearing changes.
4. Executable task sections drafted.
5. Verification and acceptance criteria attached.
6. Handoff and re-review step recorded.

Keep task names outcome-based. Do not expose prompt or tool internals in task names.

Destination

When the user explicitly asks for a plan file and gives no destination, ask to confirm the default path under docs/plans/ using a kebab-case slug from the target, for example docs/plans/extract-auth-boundary.md. Create docs/plans/ only after the destination is confirmed. If the user only asks to generate or create a plan, return it in the conversation unless they confirm a file path. Use a user-specified path only when provided. If the user-specified path is outside docs/plans/, state that the executor must be invoked with that exact path or the plan must be copied/symlinked into the configured plans directory.

Procedure

1. Anchor to the source artifacts. Cite the approved design artifact plus decision, contract, risk, or module IDs each task addresses. Include source report finding/evidence IDs when the design came from a review. A task with no source rationale does not belong in the plan.

2. Use the plan template. ../../templates/plan.md is the skeleton: Overview, Source artifact, Success criteria, Validation Commands, Implementation Steps with executable ### Task N: sections, Acceptance criteria, Safety notes, Re-review. Put checkboxes only inside ### Task N: or ### Iteration N: sections; context sections must use plain bullets or prose.

3. Resolve the destination. For file artifacts, use the user's path. If no path is provided, ask to confirm docs/plans/<kebab-case-target>.md before writing or creating directories. When the path is outside docs/plans/, include the exact execution path or the copy/symlink instruction in the handoff.

4. Order for safety. Prefer characterization tests, seam creation, boundary repair, and fitness checks before cosmetic cleanup. Establish a safety net before changing behavior-bearing code.

5. Keep it incremental. No big-bang rewrites. Each executable task is small, independently committable, and independently verifiable. Keep the next execution horizon to five tasks or fewer before a re-review.

6. Make every task concrete. Each ### Task N: section includes:

   • Justification: source finding, evidence ref, design decision, contract, risk, or module responsibility.
   • Files: planned file paths and what changes in each.
   • Preconditions and postconditions.
   • Impact commands: concrete gitnexus impact <path-or-symbol> and gitnexus detect-changes commands when GitNexus is available; otherwise an explicit fallback such as git diff --name-only and the missing-tool note.
   • Deterministic architecture checks: if archfit is configured, name the existing gate status, the rule/config change when needed, and the focused archfit analyze --gate or archfit analyze --gate --base <ref> command. For a new gate, state the violation should fail before the fix and pass after it. Otherwise name the missing config/tool gap.
   • Verification commands: concrete test, lint, type, or fitness commands for this task, not only whole-plan commands.

Failure handling

• Missing approved design, unreadable artifact, or absent finding/evidence/ decision/contract refs: stop and ask for the missing source or run architecture-design. Do not invent refs.
• Missing ../../templates/plan.md: report the missing template and ask before using an inline fallback.
• Requested rewrite with no cited finding, design decision, or risk behind it: decline that task and name the missing rationale.
• No concrete file list or verification command can be named for a task: split, narrow, or discard the task before writing the plan.

Output

Return or write a Markdown plan shaped like ../../templates/plan.md. When writing a file with no path provided, use the confirmed default path docs/plans/<kebab-case-target>.md. Include:

• ## Source artifact: approved design path or ID plus decision, contract, risk, or module IDs used; include supporting report finding/evidence IDs when present.
• ## Success criteria: measurable outcomes tied to findings, score dimensions, design decisions, contracts, or module responsibilities. Use plain bullets, no checkboxes.
• ## Validation Commands: concrete project-wide commands to run for the whole plan, including archfit analyze gate commands (--base for deltas) when configured.
• ## Implementation Steps: at most five executable ### Task N: or ### Iteration N: sections. Each task has justification, files, preconditions, postconditions, fitness gate, impact commands, verification commands, manual checks, and checkbox work items.
• A final ### Task N: Final verification and documentation section.
• ## Acceptance criteria: checks that prove the plan is complete. Use plain bullets, no checkboxes.
• ## Safety notes: blast radius, irreversible steps, rollback notes, and the engineer/mutator/task-runner handoff.

Hard rules

• Every executable task cites a source finding, evidence ref, design decision, contract, risk, or module responsibility.
• Task headers must be ### Task N: or ### Iteration N:; N may be an integer or a small variant such as 2.5 or 2a.
• Checkboxes must appear only under executable task/iteration headings.
• Generated plan files use the user-provided path, or a confirmed default path under docs/plans/<kebab-case-target>.md.
• If a generated plan is outside docs/plans/, the handoff must say how to run it by exact path or copy/symlink it into the configured plans directory.
• Every task has a file list, fitness-gate status, and concrete per-task verification command.
• When archfit is configured, every boundary/coupling task names the archfit check or config/rule update that will make the improvement repeatable, including before-fail/after-pass expectation for new gates.
• Manual checks use plain bullets only.
• Every plan includes concrete GitNexus impact/detect-changes commands or an explicit missing-tool fallback.
• Incremental only — no rewrites the source artifact does not justify.
• The final executable task is verification/documentation/handoff.
• The plan must end with a re-review recommendation.
• The architect produces the plan and stops. Execution is someone else's job.