ijfw-plan

name	ijfw-plan
description	Use when the user says 'plan this', 'plan it', 'make a plan', 'let's plan', 'draft a plan', 'how should we tackle this', 'break this down', or invokes '/ijfw-plan'. Produces a falsifiable PLAN.md (software, book, campaign, design, research) with task breakdown, dependency wave-table, and success criteria — gated by validatePlan() + ijfw-plan-checker before dispatch.
since	1.5.0
allowed-tools	Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Grep, Glob, AskUserQuestion, Agent

IJFW Plan — domain-agnostic plan authoring

You are the orchestrator-facing trigger that turns a brief (and optionally a SPEC.md / research notes) into an executable PLAN.md. Plan output is the same shape across domains: software slice, book chapter, marketing campaign, design system release, research milestone. The deliverables differ; the structure doesn't.

This skill is the body for the /ijfw-plan slash command. Both paths land here. Slash invocation may pass [brief description] as $1.

When to fire

1. User explicitly asks: "plan this", "plan it", "make a plan", "let's plan", "draft a plan", "break this down".
2. /ijfw-plan slash command is invoked.
3. ijfw-workflow Deep path enters the Plan gate after Discovery + Research.
4. ijfw-spec-phase has emitted SPEC.md and the user wants HOW next.

If .ijfw/memory/brief.md is missing AND no SPEC.md exists for the active slice, ask one clarifying question first: What are we planning? (one sentence). Never guess.

Inputs (read in order, skip missing)

1. .ijfw/memory/brief.md — original ask + success criteria.
2. .ijfw/memory/research.md — anything Discovery / Research surfaced.
3. .planning/<milestone>/<phase>/SPEC.md — locked acceptance criteria.
4. .planning/<milestone>/<phase>/CONTEXT.md — decisions resolved in discuss.
5. .planning/ROADMAP.md — where this slice sits in the bigger arc.
6. .planning/PROJECT.md — non-negotiables.

Detect domain from brief language and project layout:

• Software: package.json, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml, source dirs.
• Book / chapter: manuscript/, chapters/, outline.md, prose-heavy brief.
• Campaign / launch: campaign/, assets/, calendar / channel language.
• Design system: tokens/, components/, design-ops language.
• Research: notes/, papers/, "review the literature" framing.

Domain choice changes vocabulary, NOT the output shape.

Output location

If a phase is active (.ijfw/state/active-milestone + .ijfw/state/active-phase both exist), write to .planning/<milestone>/<phase>/PLAN.md and also mirror the task list to .ijfw/memory/plan.md for the runtime gate to read.

Otherwise write the primary plan to .ijfw/memory/plan.md.

PLAN.md shape (same for every domain)

---
domain: software | book | campaign | design-system | research
time_budget: HOUR_1 | HOUR_2_3 | HOUR_4_5 | HOUR_6_PLUS
brief_ref: .ijfw/memory/brief.md
spec_ref: .planning/<milestone>/<phase>/SPEC.md  # optional
created_at: <ISO-8601>
---

# PLAN — <slice name>

## Goal
<One-sentence outcome — what ships when this plan completes.>

## Success Criteria
1. <Falsifiable, binary pass/fail.>
2. <...>

## Tasks

### Task task_id: T01 — <verb-noun title>
- **Deliverable:** <file path / chapter draft / asset / dataset>
- **Acceptance:** <done when ...>
- **Touches:** <file paths / chapter sections / channels>
- **Depends:** <task_id> | none
- **Risk:** low | medium | high — <one-line reason>

### Task task_id: T02 — ...

## Dependency Wave Table

| Wave | Tasks (parallel within wave) | Gates between waves |
|------|------------------------------|---------------------|
| W1   | T01, T02                     | none                |
| W2   | T03 (depends T01)            | T01 acceptance met  |
| W3   | T04, T05 (depends T02, T03)  | T03 acceptance met  |

## Out of Scope (Deferred to backlog)
- <Mentioned in brief but cut from this slice; reason.>

Multi-domain examples (substitute deliverables, keep the shape):

• Software task: Deliverable = src/auth/login.ts + test file. Acceptance = npm test -- login exit 0. Touches = src/auth/, tests/auth/.
• Book task: Deliverable = chapters/04-draft.md. Acceptance = beats 1-7 from outline covered, POV consistent, word count ±10% of target. Touches = chapters/04-*, outline.md.
• Campaign task: Deliverable = campaign/launch-week/email-1.html. Acceptance = subject line + preview text + body locked, links tracked. Touches = campaign/launch-week/, analytics/utm-plan.md.
• Design system task: Deliverable = tokens/color.v2.json. Acceptance = contrast ratios meet WCAG AA, dark-mode pair validated. Touches = tokens/, docs/migration.md.

Time-budget question (Deep only)

Before drafting, ask one AskUserQuestion to lock the time budget:

{
  "question": "How much focused time do we have for this slice?",
  "header": "Time budget",
  "options": [
    { "label": "≤ 1 hour",  "description": "Up to 3 tasks; smallest viable slice" },
    { "label": "2-3 hours", "description": "Up to 7 tasks; one feature end-to-end" },
    { "label": "4-5 hours", "description": "Up to 12 tasks; meaningful slice with polish" },
    { "label": "6+ hours",  "description": "Unlimited tasks; full milestone scope" }
  ]
}

Record the choice in PLAN.md frontmatter as time_budget. The pre-dispatch gate uses it to detect budget overrun.

Pre-dispatch gate (mechanical, MUST RUN)

Before handing the plan to execute, run the deterministic gate that's wired into the existing ijfw_state MCP tool's subagent.post-done verb routing (v1.5.0 T13 — single state-SDK face, cap stays 12/12):

// Library — no new MCP tool needed (cap is 12/12).
const { validatePlan } = require('./mcp-server/src/orchestrator/plan-checker.js');
const planText = fs.readFileSync('.ijfw/memory/plan.md', 'utf8');
const { findings, blocked } = validatePlan(planText, { strict: false });

The gate checks (all defined in plan-checker.js):

1. No placeholder tokens — TBD, FIXME, XXX, [fill me in], <placeholder>, ??? (WARN; BLOCK in strict).
2. Completeness — at least one ## Task / ### Task / task_id: block (BLOCK if zero).
3. Acceptance criteria — each task mentions acceptance / done when / criteria / expected (WARN if missing).
4. No empty steps — list items under 20 chars of substantive content WARN.
5. Dependency sanity — depends: references must resolve to a declared task_id: (BLOCK on dangling).
6. No test-skip contradiction — "add tests" + "skip tests" in the same block is a BLOCK.

If blocked === true, surface findings and STOP. Do not dispatch.

Pre-dispatch reality check (agent)

Dispatch ijfw-plan-checker against the live codebase / manuscript / asset tree to catch re-spec of work that already exists:

Task: ijfw-plan-checker
Args:
  plan_path: .ijfw/memory/plan.md
  repo_root: .

Agent flags "NEW file" / "MODIFY " claims that already exist. Reduces the v1.4.4-era pain of subagents discovering duplication mid-stream.

Output contract

After both gates pass (or with WARN-only findings explicitly acknowledged), emit a gate-result block as the LAST content of your output. Use gate="plan". Statuses: PASS | CONDITIONAL | WARN | FLAG | FAIL.

Format follows the v1.5.0 gate-result schema (see ijfw-plan-check for the canonical example).

Resume intent

If user says resume, resume plan, /ijfw-plan resume, or continue plan:

1. Load .ijfw/state/plan-hold.md. If missing: reply No plan on hold. Start a fresh plan with /ijfw-plan. and stop.
2. Echo the recorded reason + unresolved gaps so the user knows what blocked.
3. AskUserQuestion: Has this changed? Unblock and continue, or keep on hold?
   • Unblock + continue → re-run pre-dispatch gate, re-offer review.
   • Keep on hold → no-op, close.
4. On unblock: annotate .ijfw/state/plan-hold.md with resolved_at: <now> (or delete), re-run pre-dispatch gate.

Anti-patterns (do not do)

• Do NOT skip the pre-dispatch gate — that's the whole point of having it.
• Do NOT write implementation code inside PLAN.md — that's execute's job.
• Do NOT silently absorb scope from the brief that wasn't in SPEC.md — surface it as a scope leak, ask the user, then either expand SPEC.md or defer.
• Do NOT exceed the time-budget ceiling without flagging budget_overrun.
• Do NOT invent task_ids that don't resolve — every depends: must point somewhere real.

Success criteria for this skill

• PLAN.md exists at the correct path for the domain.
• Every task has a deliverable, acceptance criterion, and touched-artifact list.
• Dependency wave-table is consistent (no inversions).
• validatePlan() returns blocked: false.
• ijfw-plan-checker agent has run and findings are addressed.
• gate-result block emitted last.