mbo-plan

name

mbo-plan

description

Plan a new objective end-to-end in this repo's docs/mbo Management-By-Objective system — turn a GitHub issue or a gss draft-PR worktree into consistent design/spec/plan artifacts and track it in docs/mbo/index.md. Use this whenever the user wants to START planning or designing a new feature, skill, CLI, or service: "plan this issue", "let's design X", "spec this out", "write a plan for #N", "start an MBO / a design doc", or when they're working in a gss draft PR and want to scope the work — even if they don't say "mbo". Routes the task to the right skill workflow (skill-creator, brainstorming→writing-plans, the go/web teams) per docs/mbo/AGENTS.md. Also anchors the objective to a GitHub design issue + a gss draft PR, and — when the plan is ready and it's time to BUILD — asks whether to "break out the work / parallelize / divide it across the teams": a dependency graph of leaf tasks, each a gss feature worker with its own worktree, draft PR, and linked GitHub sub-issue, fanned out via a Workflow, blocking tasks first.

mbo-plan — plan an objective the MBO way

This repo keeps all objective-driven design work in docs/mbo/ as consistent design → spec → plan artifacts, tracked in docs/mbo/index.md. This skill drives that pipeline so every objective is captured, classified, routed to the right workflow, written in the right place with the right shape, and tracked — instead of ad-hoc docs scattered around.

Source of truth: read docs/mbo/AGENTS.md first. It owns the pipeline, the task-type → skill-workflow routing table, the slug/naming conventions, and the state lifecycle. This skill is the procedure; that file is the policy. If they ever disagree, AGENTS.md wins.

Procedure

1 — Capture the objective

Find out what you're planning and pin a short slug (e.g. prping, sdk-migration):

• From an issue: gh issue view <N> --json number,title,body,labels — the title/body is the objective; note the issue number for index.md.
• From a gss draft PR worktree (the common "I'm working on this right now" case): detect the current branch and its PR — gh pr view --json number,title,body,isDraft,headRefName (no arg uses the current branch). If there's no PR yet but you're on a gss feature worktree, the branch name + the user's intent define the objective; offer to open the draft PR with gss pr so there's something to attach to.
• Derive the slug from the title (short, kebab-case, no date — dates live inside the docs and in index.md).

2 — Classify and route

Decide the task type and pick the matching skill workflow from the routing table in docs/mbo/AGENTS.md. The common cases:

Objective is…	Workflow to run
a new skill	skill-creator:skill-creator → superpowers:writing-skills
a dotfiles feature (shell/opt//ai//install)	superpowers:brainstorming → superpowers:writing-plans → TDD
a Go CLI under sdk/	brainstorming → writing-plans; mirror sdk/gss; engage go-team (go-goarch) for interfaces
a Go RPC/gRPC service	go-goarch (proto/boundaries) → writing-plans → go-godev/go-goqa
a UI / web piece	brainstorming (visual companion) → web-team → writing-plans
AWS infra/serverless	deploy-on-aws:* / aws-core:* / terraform-aws team
a large audit/migration	a Workflow fanned out to the architecture team → writing-plans

Don't reinvent the analysis — invoke the skill the table points to. This skill's job is to make sure the right one runs and the output lands in the right place.

3 — Produce the artifacts (from templates)

Copy the relevant starter(s) from docs/mbo/templates/ and let the routed workflow fill them:

• Design → docs/mbo/designs/<slug>.md (from templates/design.md) — only for novel / architectural work; skip for trivial objectives.
• Spec → docs/mbo/specs/<slug>.md (from templates/spec.md) — the brainstorming output: goal, use cases, evaluation criteria per feature, verification harness.
• Plan → docs/mbo/plans/<slug>.md (from templates/plan.md) — the writing-plans output: file inventory, TDD build order, traceability.

Keep the slug identical across the three so they correlate. Use the bare slug as the filename.

4 — Register in the index

Add or update the objective's row in docs/mbo/index.md: slug, links to whichever artifacts exist, issue number(s), PR number(s), and the state (idea → designing → specifying → planning → building → in-review → merged). The index is how anyone finds what exists and where it stands — never skip it.

5 — Anchor the objective: design ISSUE + design DRAFT PR (CAP-A)

Every objective gets two GitHub anchors, both recorded in index.md:

1. A design ISSUE — the durable tracker for the objective (survives across PRs).
   • Locate it: if the user named #N, use it. Else search: gh issue list --search "<slug> in:title" --state open --json number,title.
   • Create it if absent (confirm first): gh issue create --title "<slug>: <objective>" --body "<one-liner + links to docs/mbo/ artifacts>".
   • This issue is the parent for the build sub-issues in CAP-C, and the objective's live dashboard: GitHub's native sub-issue tree + progress bar (subIssuesSummary) reflect build state automatically. Do not hand-maintain a task-list checklist — on this endpoint a Markdown task list does not drive the rollup (trackedIssues is empty); native sub-issues are the authoritative progress facet. Body = the objective one-liner + links to the docs/mbo/ artifacts + a small mermaid/ASCII DAG mirrored from plan §6 (sub-issues give order + progress, but not edges — the DAG fills that gap; GitHub renders mermaid).
2. A design DRAFT PR — where the docs/mbo/... artifacts are committed and reviewed.
   • If you're already on a gss feature worker / draft PR, commit the artifacts there.
   • If not, open one as draft. Prefer a gss feature worker (gss feature start <slug> → worker add) so the design PR and the CAP-C build PRs live in one stack; fall back to gss pr (draft) for a standalone doc PR.
   • Per the repo's gss rules, confirm via the interactive prompt before any git add/commit/gss push/gss pr. Never run install.sh from a worker worktree.

Always locate before create (re-running on an existing objective must not spawn a duplicate): search by slug, create only on a miss, confirm the create, record the resulting numbers in index.md immediately so the next run finds them there. The issue body and PR description link the docs/mbo/ artifacts; index.md records issue#, PR#, and state. The slug is the join key.

Where the dependency graph lives (single source): the plan doc docs/mbo/plans/<slug>.md §6's "Build leaves / DAG" subsection (see §6b for its shape: an edge list + per-leaf done-when gate + blocking-first order) is the authoritative, reviewable graph; everything else (design-issue mermaid DAG, GitHub sub-issue tree, gss feature list, index.md's leaf sub-table) is a generated/mirrored projection. This is policy — the normative statement lives in docs/mbo/AGENTS.md § Build-breakout policy; this skill is the procedure that applies it.

6 — BUILD breakout: decompose → dependency graph → Workflow fan-out (CAP-B, optional)

When the plan is approved and it's time to build, ASK the user (via the interactive prompt) whether to break the work out for parallel team execution, or build it sequentially in one PR. Default to NOT breaking out — parallelism pays off only when leaves are genuinely independent and the integration cost is lower than the serial cost. Only if they choose parallel:

6a. Cut the plan into LEAF tasks. A leaf is the smallest unit one worker can finish without touching another leaf's files. Derive leaves from the plan's §2 file inventory + §3 interface contracts: group files that change together behind one interface into one leaf.

• Good leaf: owns a disjoint set of paths; depends on others only through a frozen interface (a Go interface, a proto message, a CLI/stdout contract, a file format) declared in the plan — not through shared implementation. Independently testable, with a done-when gate recorded in its plan §6 row — the objective check that closes its sub-issue and promotes its draft PR. Reuse the repo's existing bars (the sdk/ Go ≥60% coverage gate, superpowers:verification-before-completion); don't invent per-leaf criteria. A leaf with no testable gate isn't really a leaf.
• False split (merge it back): two "leaves" edit the same files, or one needs the other's internals, or the interface between them is still in flux. Splitting these trades one PR for two PRs plus a perpetual rebase. When in doubt, fewer, larger leaves.

6b. Build the DEPENDENCY GRAPH. For each leaf list what it consumes (an interface another leaf produces). Edge A → B = "B depends on A's interface". This must be a DAG — a cycle means the split is wrong, merge the cycle into one leaf. Classify:

• BLOCKING (sequence first): a leaf whose interface others import — typically the go-goarch-owned interface/proto/contract leaf. Do these first so downstream leaves compile against a frozen contract. Interface-First.
• LEAF (parallel): no outgoing edges, or depends only on already-merged blocking leaves. These fan out concurrently and finish fastest.

Record the graph in the plan's §6 so it's reviewable and survives into CAP-C. The templates/plan.md §6 ("Integration & rollout") has no structured slot for it, so add a concrete "Build leaves / DAG" subsection there — leaf → owns-paths → consumes (in-edges) → done-when gate → blocking?. Frozen interfaces themselves stay in §3; §6 references them:

### 6.x Build leaves / DAG   (authoritative graph — mirrored to issue body & gss bases)
| Leaf | Owns (paths) | Consumes (← edge) | done-when gate | Blocking? |
| :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- |
| iface | pkg/foo/iface.go | — | go build + ≥60% cov on stub | yes (base) |
| api   | pkg/foo/api/**   | iface (§3 Foo iface) | go test ./api ≥60% + verification-before-completion | no |

A → B means B's row lists A under Consumes. The order column (Blocking? = yes) is the blocking-first sequence for §6c / CAP-C. Keep this table in sync with the gss worker bases (§7).

6c. Fan out via a Workflow. Sequence the blocking leaves first; then dispatch the parallel leaves with the Workflow tool (/workflows), routing each leaf to the right team via /team (go → go-team, web → web-team, CI → ai-ci, infra → terraform-aws) per the same routing table in docs/mbo/AGENTS.md.

Pick ONE isolation mechanism per leaf — they don't compose over the same paths. Which mechanism maps to which kind of leaf (gss feature worker for code-producing leaves, ephemeral harness worktree isolation for read-only leaves, tmux-mgr panes for human-observable sessions) is policy, stated normatively in docs/mbo/AGENTS.md § Build-breakout policy.

So the normal build path is: gss feature worker add creates each leaf's worktree+PR (system of record), then the Workflow//team agent (optionally surfaced via tmux-mgr) works inside that existing worktree — it does not create a second one. Reserve ephemeral harness worktree isolation (EnterWorktree is the verified tool; whether the Workflow tool exposes an equivalent isolation option must be confirmed against the Workflow tool's own schema at call time — it is not assertable from this repo) for read-only leaves. Never point an ephemeral worktree and a gss worker at the same paths.

7 — Per-leaf workers, sub-issues, and graph state (CAP-C)

Lean on gss feature — it already is the worktree + draft-PR + dependency-graph engine. Do not reinvent worktree/PR plumbing. One leaf = one worker.

• One feature per objective: gss feature start <slug> --goal "<objective>" (once).

• One worker per leaf: gss feature worker add --feature <slug> --purpose <leaf> --description "<leaf goal>" --base <base> --json (--description and --purpose are required; --json emits {worker_ref,branch,worktree_path,base_branch} — capture it to script the worktree cd and the sub-issue cross-link). --base IS the dependency edge: a leaf depending on blocking leaf X is created --base <X's branch> so it stacks on X; independent leaves omit --base and inherit the feature's default base (main). This makes the 6b DAG literal in the stack — so create blocking leaves before their dependents, or the base branch won't exist yet. Tag provenance with --engine claude / --pane-id / --session-id when a Workflow or tmux-mgr agent will drive it.

• Per-leaf draft PR: in each worker worktree, gss feature checkpoint rebases, pushes, and creates the draft PR on first run / updates it thereafter, refreshing the stack section. This is the per-leaf draft-PR verb — the classic gss push/pr are refused inside a worker worktree. Confirm via the interactive prompt before the push. checkpoint --auto is the non-interactive variant for hooks (--auto --dry-run previews); don't use --auto to bypass the mandatory human confirmation in an interactive run.

• Per-leaf SUB-ISSUE linked to the design issue (native sub-issues — GitHub does the tracking): native sub-issues are GA on this repo (verified: addSubIssue mutation + Issue.subIssuesSummary present; the REST sub_issues endpoint returns 201). gh issue create has no --parent flag (gh 2.92), so create the child then link via the REST endpoint. The path addresses the parent by issue number, but sub_issue_id is the child's REST database id (.id) — not its issue number and not its GraphQL node_id (the #1 gotcha):

  child=$(gh issue create --title "<slug>/<leaf>: <goal>" \
            --body "Part of #<N> · plan §6 · PR: (pending)" | grep -oE '[0-9]+$')
  cid=$(gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/$child --jq .id)          # REST .id — NOT number/node_id
  gh api --method POST repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/<N>/sub_issues -F sub_issue_id=$cid   # 201 = linked
  

  Idempotent — list first, skip if present: gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/<N>/sub_issues --jq '.[].number'. The parent's progress bar updates automatically when the child closes as completed (the default close reason / PR auto-close).

• PR ↔ sub-issue (the load-bearing link): put Closes #<sub-issue> in the worker's draft-PR body (the gss feature checkpoint PR). That fills the Development panels and auto-closes the sub-issue as completed on merge, ticking the parent dashboard with zero manual steps. Set the sub-issue's PR: line to #<pr> once the PR exists so the cross-link shows before merge.

• Overlap = a false split surfaced: gss feature conflicts --json lists paths touched by >1 worker. Any overlap means two leaves aren't independent — merge them or re-cut the boundary (run it as a dry-run gate on proposed boundaries before fan-out), don't paper over it with rebases.

• State: gss feature list --tree (or --feature <slug> --json) renders the live stack/graph — the gss registry is authoritative for worker/PR/base state; don't hand-maintain a parallel copy. In index.md, under the objective's row add a small leaf sub-table mirroring only what gss doesn't track — the leaf → team → sub-issue mapping — with PR#/state read from gss feature list --json, not guessed:

  ### <slug> — build leaves (feature: `<slug>`; graph in plans/<slug>.md §6; `gss feature list --tree`)
  | Leaf | Team | Worker | Sub-issue | Draft PR | Blocking? |
  | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- |
  | iface  | go-goarch | <slug>/.../iface | #<sub> | #<pr> | yes (base) |
  | api    | go-godev  | <slug>/.../api   | #<sub> | #<pr> | no |
  

8 — Integrate: blocking-first, then reconcile leaves (CAP-C)

• Land blocking leaves first (they're the stack bottom). When a worker's PR merges, gss feature merged re-targets its children onto the merged base and (when the stack is linear and the single child has restack_count 0) auto-promotes the next draft to ready — this is the integration walk down the DAG. A wide fan-out (one blocking leaf → N parallel children) does not auto-promote: re-target the children onto the merged base and promote each manually.
• Re-target a moved edge with gss feature restack <worker> --onto <newBase> (note: restack permanently opts a worker out of auto-promote — minimize manual restacks).
• Tear down a finished leaf with gss feature done <worker>; close its sub-issue; advance the objective's index.md state (building → in-review → merged → done). Design issue end-state: for a design-only objective, close it when the design PR lands; when CAP-B/C is used it's the build-tracking parent — close it only when every sub-issue is closed.

Notes

• One slug, one objective. Slug joins the design issue, the design PR, the gss feature, and all docs/mbo/ artifacts. Per-leaf workers/sub-issues/PRs hang off that one objective.
• gss is the single writer for PRs and the registry. Workflow/team agents and tmux-mgr drive work inside worker worktrees; only gss feature checkpoint/merged/restack/done mutate branch/PR/stack state. Local rebase conflicts → the git-machete skill; gss still owns PRs.
• Re-entrant & resumable. CAP-A/C are long-running — assume the skill is re-invoked mid-flight. Every create is locate-before-create (issue, PR, worker, sub-issue), so a second run reconciles instead of duplicating. Recover live state from the systems of record, not memory: gss feature list --feature <slug> --json (workers/PRs/bases), gh api .../sub_issues (links), index.md (slug → issue/PR). If the registry drifts from the worktrees/remote, repair with gss feature audit before continuing — observable state wins over the registry. Worked drift recovery (e.g. a worker's worktree was deleted out-of-band, or a PR 404s):

  gss feature audit --feature <slug> --json   # 1. inspect: lists missing worktrees, 404 PRs, diverged bases
  gss feature audit --feature <slug> --repair # 2. deterministic registry-local fixes only — never force-pushes,
                                              #    renames a branch, or calls a mutating gh verb; non-zero exit on error-severity
  gss feature list --feature <slug> --tree    # 3. reconcile: confirm the stack/graph matches the plan §6 DAG
  

  --repair heals the registry; it does not recreate a deleted worktree or reopen a PR — for a genuinely lost leaf, re-run gss feature worker add (locate-before-create skips live ones) and re-checkpoint. Sync the index.md leaf sub-table and sub-issue PR: lines from the repaired gss feature list --json afterward.
• Lead with facts. Ground designs and leaf boundaries in what's verified in the repo (read the code, run the greps), not assumptions.
• The pipeline is partial-order, not rigid. A bugfix may be plan-only and single-PR (skip CAP-B/C entirely); an ADR may be design-only. Always register it in index.md; produce only the artifacts and breakout the objective warrants.