Installer avec Codex ou Claude Copiez ce prompt, collez-le dans Codex, Claude ou un autre assistant, puis laissez-le vérifier la page du skill et l'installer pour vous.
Une commande directe contourne le prompt de vérification. Examinez la source avant de l'exécuter.
harness-plan is a planning surface that produces co-required planning output of spec.md product contract and Plans.md task contract.
Precedence remains spec.md > sub-spec > Plans.md.
Plans.md is a task ledger; root spec.md is a product contract; the hierarchy must not be broken.
Do not convert provided information directly into Plans.md.
For plan creation and significant task additions, verify the latest information, existing specifications, memory, and TeamAgent / sub-agent multi-perspective discussions,
and only convert elements worth incorporating into this product into task contracts.
/harness-plan create returns Spec delta or Spec skip reason paired with Plans.md task generation.
Output must always include Spec delta or Spec skip reason.
Harness generates Spec delta / Spec skip reason; the consumer only approves or revises.
Non-trivial planning gate:
Planning that is not single-instance or lightweight is treated as requiring TeamAgent or sub-agents.
Non-trivial here refers to requests affecting multiple tasks / multiple files / multiple sessions / product behavior / API / data model / permissions / billing / external integrations / distribution surfaces / security.
If the Task tool is available, run independent perspectives for Product / Architecture / Security / QA / Skeptic.
If unavailable, explicitly state "sub-agent not used" and evaluate the same perspectives separately.
Non-trivial planning output must always include the following verifications.
Wheel-reinvention prevention check via harness-mem / harness-recall / repo memory
Not deviating from the product purpose
No issues with security, permissions, secrets, or supply chain
Whether lint / formatter baseline exists; if a plan with source code changes has none configured, place a setup task before implementation tasks
Whether the plan actually works — i.e., whether test / smoke / CI / review / release gates are included in task DoD
Use team_validation_mode: not_required_lightweight for lightweight tasks.
For non-trivial planning, use one of native / subagent / manual-pass.
Must not leave it as unavailable and make it Required.
Product / Architecture / Security / QA / Skeptic are verification perspectives, not agent_type names.
Request them as perspectives from available TeamAgent / Task sub-agents; do not require arbitrary agent spawning.
The Security gate does not require actual reading of secrets.
If reading .env or secrets becomes necessary, stop at a Risk Gate and verify using allowed existing guards / evidence.
When to apply:
Creating a new plan with create
Adding tasks with add that affect product behavior / API / permissions / billing / external integrations / distribution surfaces
User has provided external products, competitors, specification proposals, improvement ideas, or comparison materials
There is a risk of conflict with existing specifications or past decisions
When to treat lightly:
update with only marker updates
sync with only status reconciliation
typo, format, README/CHANGELOG only
Narrow changes where the correct answer is fixed by existing spec and tests
Quality flow:
Decompose input, clearly state evaluation targets, scoring axes, and uncertain facts
Get latest information. Prioritize WebSearch / official docs / primary sources for external facts; cross-check important points against multiple sources
Check available memory surfaces project-scoped: harness-mem / harness-recall / .claude/agent-memory/ / .claude/state/, etc.
For non-trivial planning, use TeamAgent / Task sub-agents for independent review from different perspectives such as Product / Architecture / Security / QA / Skeptic
For plans with source code changes, check lint / formatter baseline; if not configured, add setup task first
Output neutral scoring review and classify as Required / Recommended / Optional / Reject
Report proposal content, reason, and what changes in $easy format
Incorporate only adopted proposals into root spec.md / Plans.md / test tasks
Plans.md is treated as the task contract for "what needs to be done"; root spec.md is treated as the product contract for "what is correct."
Co-required planning output means making both outputs required; precedence remains spec.md > sub-spec > Plans.md.
When implementation is likely to drift, update root spec.md before generating Plans.md.
create and product-impacting add always read root spec.md.
Priority for storage location:
Root spec.md
Only when consumer repo has no root spec.md: existing project spec / architecture / product compass
Only when consumer repo has no root spec.md: docs/spec/00-project-spec.md
For repos with existing conventions, follow the spec path per those conventions
Conditions requiring creation/update:
Tasks that decide user-visible behavior, API, data model, permissions, billing, or external integrations
Tasks where multiple implementation policies exist and the choice changes product behavior
Tasks where "spec ambiguity caused implementation drift" is evident in past or current conversations
Tasks where the work content is in Plans.md but the project's correct conditions are not in a stable document
Conditions not requiring it:
typo, format, dependency bump, README/CHANGELOG only
Narrow refactor without behavior changes
Fixes where the correct answer is sufficiently fixed by existing spec and tests
Output contract:
Spec delta: When updating the product contract, write the target spec path and what changes
Spec skip reason: When not updating the product contract, write the reason
Harness generates Spec delta / Spec skip reason; the consumer only approves or revises
Leave Spec skip reason in task context / sprint contract even for docs-only / mechanical tasks
Do not assert absent for missing search results, unavailable memory, or unread files. not_observed != absent
Do not have the user write the spec from scratch. The agent creates the minimum delta from existing spec and input, only presenting decision branches when ambiguous
Reference:
docs/plans/spec-ssot.md
Session launch guidance after create (required)
After create completes, do not end with just an explanation; always provide the new session launch command and
the first instruction prompt to enter right after launch as a set.
Priority order:
Only 1 incomplete task, or natural to start with just the first one
Launch command: claude
First input: /harness-work <task number>
Multiple tasks with loose dependencies, natural to advance together
Launch command: claude
First input: /breezing all
Alternative: /harness-work all
Long-running execution or re-entry required
Launch command: ENABLE_PROMPT_CACHING_1H=1 claude
First input: /harness-loop all
Alternative: /breezing all
Include at least these 3 lines:
New session launch command:
First input after launch:
Suited for:
Example:
New session launch command: claude
First input after launch: /breezing all
Suited for: Phase 1 has multiple tasks and advancing them together is most natural
When recommending long-running mode, also include the Claude Code session launch command:
New session launch command: ENABLE_PROMPT_CACHING_1H=1 claude
First input after launch: /harness-loop all
Suited for: Long-running tasks where waits exceeding 5 minutes or resumptions across sessions are likely
Note:
scripts/claude-longrun.sh is a development helper script for this repository and is not distributed to consumer environments after plugin install
Therefore, for consumer-facing guidance, always prioritize the single-line command ENABLE_PROMPT_CACHING_1H=1 claude
When in a local checkout and you want to use an equivalent wrapper only during repository development, bash scripts/claude-longrun.sh may be used
CI mode (--ci):
No interview. Use existing Plans.md as-is and only perform task decomposition.
add — Add task
Add a new task to Plans.md.
For product-impacting additions, output Spec delta or Spec skip reason following the "spec.md / Plans.md dual-source check" above.
Detect differences between Plans.md and implementation
Propose auto-fix for outdated markers
Present next actions
Retrospective (default ON):
Automatically run a retrospective if there is at least 1 cc:done task.
Analyze estimate accuracy, block cause patterns, and scope fluctuation; record learnings.
Can be explicitly skipped with sync --no-retro.
team mode / issue bridge
Keep Plans.md as the source of truth; use GitHub Issue integration only in opt-in team mode.
Do not use bridge in solo development
Team mode creates one tracking issue and generates sub-issue payloads per task in dry-run
scripts/plans-issue-bridge.sh never actually updates GitHub; always returns dry-run payloads
This bridge does not modify Plans.md
Reference:
docs/plans/team-mode.md
named Plans
When using multiple Plans.md, use plans/manifest.json as the source of truth and select by name.
DoD (Definition of Done): Write the verifiable completion condition in one line. "Looks good" or "works properly" are prohibited. Must be determinable Yes/No.
Depends: Task dependencies. - (no dependency), task number (N.1), comma-separated (N.1, N.2), phase dependency (Phase N).
TDD tags
Tasks in Plans.md can have TDD judgment tags in their content or DoD.
Tag
Meaning
tdd_required inference
[tdd:required]
This task must write failing tests first
true
[tdd:skip:<reason>]
This task skips TDD with a reason
false, skip_tdd_reason=<reason>
Do not leave <reason> empty.
Examples: [tdd:skip:docs-only], [tdd:skip:no-test-framework-detected].
When no tag is present, infer tdd_required in this order:
