| name | implement-plan |
| description | Implement approved technical plans from thoughts/shared/plans/. **ALWAYS use when** the user says 'implement the plan', 'start implementing', 'build from the plan', or wants to execute a previously created implementation plan using TDD (Red-Green-Refactor). Supports team mode for parallel implementation. |
| disable-model-invocation | false |
| allowed-tools | Read, Write, Edit, Grep, Glob, Task, TodoWrite, Bash |
| version | 1.0.0 |
Implement Plan
You are tasked with implementing an approved technical plan from thoughts/shared/plans/. These
plans contain phases with specific changes and success criteria.
Prerequisites
if [[ -f "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/check-project-setup.sh" ]]; then
"${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/check-project-setup.sh" || exit 1
fi
RECENT_PLAN=""
if [[ -f "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/workflow-context.sh" ]]; then
RECENT_PLAN=$("${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/workflow-context.sh" recent plans)
fi
if [[ -n "$RECENT_PLAN" ]]; then
echo "📋 Auto-discovered recent plan: $RECENT_PLAN"
else
echo "⚠️ No recent plan found in workflow context or filesystem"
fi
Session Tracking
SESSION_SCRIPT="${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/catalyst-session.sh"
if [[ -x "$SESSION_SCRIPT" ]]; then
CATALYST_SESSION_ID=$("$SESSION_SCRIPT" start --skill "implement-plan" \
--ticket "${TICKET_ID:-}" \
--workflow "${CATALYST_SESSION_ID:-}")
export CATALYST_SESSION_ID
"$SESSION_SCRIPT" phase "$CATALYST_SESSION_ID" "implementing" --phase 1
fi
Initial Response
Auto-discovery has already run in Prerequisites above. Check its output and follow this priority:
-
If user provided a plan path as parameter: Use the provided path (user override). Skip to
Step 3.
-
If no parameter provided AND Prerequisites output shows a discovered plan (📋):
- Show user the discovered plan path
- Ask: "Proceed with this plan? [Y/n]"
- If yes: use it and skip to Step 3
- If no: proceed to option 3
-
If no parameter AND Prerequisites shows no plan found (⚠️):
- List available plans from
thoughts/shared/plans/
- Show most recent 5 plans with dates and ticket numbers
- Ask user which plan to implement
- Wait for user input with plan path
STEP 3: Read and prepare
Once you have a plan path:
- Read the plan completely (no limit/offset)
- Check for any existing checkmarks (- [x]) to see what's done
- Read the original ticket and all files mentioned in the plan
- Extract ticket from plan frontmatter (
source_ticket field) and update Linear state
to stateMap.inProgress from config using Linearis CLI (run linearis issues usage for syntax).
If Linearis CLI is not available, skip silently and continue implementation.
Skip the status transition when CATALYST_PHASE is set — under a phase agent
(e.g. phase-implement, or this skill invoked as a sub-task from phase-pr /
phase-monitor-merge during PR resolution / CI fix-up loops) the deterministic
coordinator (CTL-558) owns the Linear status write-back. A direct write here
would regress the ticket from PR back to Implement, producing operator-visible
state flicker (CTL-601). Mirrors the gate in create-pr/SKILL.md:227-232.
- Think deeply about how the pieces fit together
- Create a todo list to track your progress
- Start implementing if you understand what needs to be done
Implementation Philosophy
Plans are carefully designed, but reality can be messy. Your job is to:
- Follow TDD: write tests before implementation code in each phase
- Follow the plan's intent while adapting to what you find
- Implement each phase fully before moving to the next
- Verify your work makes sense in the broader codebase context
- Update checkboxes in the plan as you complete sections
TDD Rhythm Per Phase
For each phase, follow Red → Green → Refactor:
- Red — Write the tests specified in the plan's "Tests First" section. Run them to confirm they
fail.
- Green — Implement the minimum code from the plan's "Implementation" section to make tests
pass.
- Refactor — Clean up while keeping tests green. Apply any refactoring notes from the plan.
This order is non-negotiable. If a phase doesn't have a "Tests First" section, write tests for the
phase's expected behavior before implementing. The tests serve as executable acceptance criteria.
When things don't match the plan exactly, think about why and communicate clearly. The plan is your
guide, but your judgment matters too.
If you encounter a mismatch:
-
STOP and think deeply about why the plan can't be followed
-
Present the issue clearly:
Issue in Phase [N]:
Expected: [what the plan says]
Found: [actual situation]
Why this matters: [explanation]
How should I proceed?
Verification Approach
Within each phase (TDD cycle):
- Write tests first → run them → confirm they fail (Red)
- Write implementation → run tests → confirm they pass (Green)
- Refactor if needed → run tests → confirm they still pass (Refactor)
After completing a phase:
- Run the full success criteria checks (usually
make check test covers everything)
- Fix any issues before proceeding
- Update your progress in both the plan and your todos
- Check off completed items in the plan file itself using Edit
- Check context usage - monitor token consumption
- Push + ensure the draft PR (phase-agent mode) — In phase-agent mode the draft PR opens
at the first phase commit (see the
implement-plan-draft-pr-early fence); interactive
/catalyst-dev:implement-plan runs skip this automatically via the CATALYST_PHASE gate.
if [[ -n "${CATALYST_PHASE:-}" && -r "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/lib/draft-pr.sh" ]]; then
source "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/lib/draft-pr.sh"
if [[ "$(draft_pr_enabled)" == "true" ]]; then
draft_pr_push || true
draft_pr_ensure "main" "${TICKET_ID:-${CATALYST_TICKET:-}}" >/dev/null 2>&1 || true
fi
fi
Don't let verification interrupt your flow - batch full suite runs at natural stopping points. But
always run the specific tests you wrote during each Red → Green cycle.
Context Management During Implementation
Monitor context proactively throughout implementation:
After Each Phase:
✅ Phase {N} complete!
## 📊 Context Status
Current usage: {X}% ({Y}K/{Z}K tokens)
{If >60%}:
⚠️ **Context Alert**: We're at {X}% usage.
**Recommendation**: Create a handoff before continuing to Phase {N+1}.
**Why?** Implementation accumulates context:
- File reads
- Code changes
- Test outputs
- Error messages
- Context clears ensure continued high performance
**Options**:
1. ✅ Create handoff and clear context (recommended)
- Use `/create-handoff` to generate properly formatted handoff
- Format: `thoughts/shared/handoffs/{ticket}/YYYY-MM-DD_HH-MM-SS_description.md`
- Includes timestamp for lexical sorting by recency
2. Continue to next phase (if close to completion)
**To resume**: Start fresh session, run `/implement-plan {plan-path}`
(The plan file tracks progress with checkboxes - you'll resume automatically)
{If <60%}:
✅ Context healthy. Ready for Phase {N+1}.
When to Warn:
- After any phase if context >60%
- If context >70%, strongly recommend handoff
- If context >80%, STOP and require handoff
- If user is spinning on errors (3+ attempts), suggest context clear
Educate About Phase-Based Context:
- Explain that implementation is designed to work in chunks
- Each phase completion is a natural handoff point
- Plan file preserves progress across sessions
- Fresh context = fresh perspective on next phase
Creating a Handoff:
When recommending a handoff, guide the user:
- Offer to create the handoff using
/create-handoff
- Or create a manual handoff following the timestamp convention
- Handoff filename format:
thoughts/shared/handoffs/{ticket}/YYYY-MM-DD_HH-MM-SS_description.md
- Include: completed phases, next steps, key learnings, file references
- Update plan file with checkboxes for completed work
Quality Gates (After All Phases Complete)
After all implementation phases pass, run quality gates before marking work as done. These gates
catch issues that per-phase testing might miss.
Gate execution order:
Quality Gates:
├── 1. /validate-type-safety → tsc + reward hacking scan + tsconfig check + tests + lint
├── 2. /security-review → scan for security vulnerabilities (built-in Claude Code skill)
├── 3. code-reviewer agent → style/guideline adherence check
└── 4. pr-test-analyzer agent → test coverage verification
Running the Gates
Gate 1: Type Safety Validation
Invoke /validate-type-safety. This runs the full 5-step gate (type check, reward hacking scan,
test inclusion, tests, lint). If it fails, fix issues and re-run before proceeding.
Gate 2: Security Review
Invoke the built-in /security-review skill. Review findings and fix any vulnerabilities before
proceeding.
Gate 3: Code Review
Spawn the code-reviewer agent:
Agent(subagent_type="pr-review-toolkit:code-reviewer",
prompt="Review the uncommitted changes for adherence to project guidelines and style.")
Address any findings that violate project conventions.
Gate 4: Test Coverage
Spawn the pr-test-analyzer agent:
Agent(subagent_type="pr-review-toolkit:pr-test-analyzer",
prompt="Analyze test coverage for the uncommitted changes. Identify critical gaps.")
If critical gaps exist, write the missing tests.
File Improvement Findings
Recording findings during implementation. When a phase surfaces friction worth fixing —
a bug noticed in adjacent code, a step that shouldn't need manual intervention, a gap in
tooling — record it the moment it's observed:
"${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/add-finding.sh" \
--title "Short imperative title" \
--body "Reproduction + expected + observed + any links" \
--skill implement-plan
Findings go to a shared queue (under orchestrate/oneshot, that skill's queue; direct
invocations get a per-session queue). The block below files the queue at end-of-run. It's a
safety net: when implement-plan runs under /orchestrate or /oneshot, the parent's
filing step drains the same queue first and this block finds an empty file:
FEEDBACK="${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/file-feedback.sh"
CONSENT="${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/feedback-consent.sh"
FINDINGS_FILE="${CATALYST_FINDINGS_FILE:-.catalyst/findings/${CATALYST_SESSION_ID:-current}.jsonl}"
if [ -x "$FEEDBACK" ] && [ -f "$FINDINGS_FILE" ] && [ -s "$FINDINGS_FILE" ]; then
COUNT=$(wc -l < "$FINDINGS_FILE" | tr -d ' ')
if [ "$("$CONSENT" check)" != "granted" ] && [ -z "${CATALYST_AUTONOMOUS:-}" ] && [ -t 0 ]; then
read -r -p "File $COUNT improvement tickets now? [Y/n] " yn
case "$yn" in [Nn]*) : ;; *) "$CONSENT" grant >/dev/null ;; esac
fi
if [ "$("$CONSENT" check)" = "granted" ]; then
FILED=0
while IFS= read -r line; do
TITLE=$(jq -r '.title' <<<"$line")
BODY=$(jq -r '.body' <<<"$line")
SKILL=$(jq -r '.skill // "implement-plan"' <<<"$line")
RESULT=$("$FEEDBACK" --title "$TITLE" --body "$BODY" --skill "$SKILL" --json 2>/dev/null || true)
STATUS=$(jq -r '.status // "failed"' <<<"$RESULT")
if [ "$STATUS" = "filed" ]; then
ID=$(jq -r '.identifier // .url // ""' <<<"$RESULT")
echo " filed: $ID ($TITLE)"
FILED=$((FILED + 1))
fi
done < "$FINDINGS_FILE"
[ "$FILED" -eq "$COUNT" ] && rm -f "$FINDINGS_FILE"
fi
fi
End Session Tracking
After all quality gates pass (or are skipped), end the session:
if [[ -n "${CATALYST_SESSION_ID:-}" && -x "$SESSION_SCRIPT" ]]; then
"$SESSION_SCRIPT" end "$CATALYST_SESSION_ID" --status done
fi
Autofix Behavior
For gates 1 and 2, attempt to fix issues automatically and re-run the gate. For gates 3 and 4,
address findings and verify. If a gate fails after 2 fix attempts, report the remaining issues to
the user and ask how to proceed.
Skipping Quality Gates
If the plan or user specifies --skip-quality-gates, skip this section entirely. Report that
quality gates were skipped in the completion summary.
If You Get Stuck
When something isn't working as expected:
- First, make sure you've read and understood all the relevant code
- Consider if the codebase has evolved since the plan was written
- Present the mismatch clearly and ask for guidance
Use sub-tasks sparingly - mainly for targeted debugging or exploring unfamiliar territory.
Resuming Work
If the plan has existing checkmarks:
- Trust that completed work is done
- Pick up from the first unchecked item
- Verify previous work only if something seems off
Remember: You're implementing a solution, not just checking boxes. Keep the end goal in mind and
maintain forward momentum.
Agent Team Mode (Optional)
When invoked with --team flag or when the plan spans 3+ independent domains:
When to Use Team Mode
- Plan has phases that can be implemented in parallel
- Changes span distinct domains (frontend, backend, tests, infra)
- Each domain's changes don't overlap in files
Team Structure
Lead (Opus) — Coordinates implementation
├── Teammate 1 (Sonnet) — Frontend changes
│ └── Can spawn subagents for research
├── Teammate 2 (Sonnet) — Backend changes
│ └── Can spawn subagents for research
└── Teammate 3 (Sonnet) — Test changes
└── Can spawn subagents for research
Process
- Analyze plan phases — Identify which phases can be parallelized
- Assign file ownership — Each teammate gets distinct files (no overlap)
- Create task list — Use TaskCreate with dependencies between phases
- Launch team — Spawn teammates with focused instructions
- Review gates — Lead reviews teammate work via approvePlan/rejectPlan
- Integration — Lead verifies all changes work together
- Commit — Single atomic commit or per-phase commits
Important Constraints
- File ownership is strict — no two teammates edit the same file
- Sequential phases stay sequential — only parallelize truly independent work
- Lead reviews all code — use plan approval gates before proceeding
- Fallback gracefully — if agent teams unavailable, execute sequentially
Linear Integration
If a ticket is detected (from plan document's source_ticket frontmatter or from context):
- At implementation start (Step 3): Update ticket status to
stateMap.inProgress from config
using Linearis CLI (run linearis issues usage for syntax).
- Skip the status transition when
CATALYST_PHASE is set — the deterministic coordinator
(CTL-558) owns Linear write-back under phase agents. See the gate at Step 3 above for
details. CTL-601 — without this gate, invoking this skill as a sub-task from another phase
agent (typical in phase-pr / phase-monitor-merge resolution loops) regresses the ticket
state to Implement and produces operator-visible flicker.
- If Linearis CLI not available, skip silently and continue implementation