implement-feature

name	implement-feature
description	Implement a GitHub issue end-to-end — scope it (whole issue or specific phases), build an acceptance-criteria plan from its design doc, get the plan approved, then develop autonomously with tests and a mandatory code review.
argument-hint	[issue number]

Implement a Feature from a GitHub Issue

Take a GitHub issue as the entry point and carry it through to a reviewed, tested implementation: scope it, plan it against its design doc, get the plan approved, then develop it autonomously.

This is the heavyweight, autonomous counterpart to /start-task: /start-task only sets up status + branch; this skill plans and implements the work.

Input

$ARGUMENTS may contain a GitHub issue number (351 or #351).

• Issue number provided → proceed to the workflow.
• Missing or non-numeric → ask the user for the issue number (a direct question or AskUserQuestion). Do not guess. The skill cannot run without an issue — the issue is the entry point.

Help

If $ARGUMENTS contains --help or -h, display the following and stop — do not execute the workflow.

/implement-feature [#N]

  Implement a GitHub issue end-to-end, autonomously.

Arguments:
  #N              Issue number (e.g., 351 or #351) — required; prompted if missing
  --help, -h      Show this help

What it does:
  1. Fetches the issue and its linked design doc
  2. Proposes the scope — whole issue, or one/several phases
  3. Builds an acceptance-criteria plan from the design doc (plan mode)
  4. On approval: develops it autonomously — code + tests
  5. Runs a mandatory code review before declaring completion
  6. Stops and asks only when a real impediment blocks completion

Examples:
  /implement-feature #351
  /implement-feature

Workflow

1. Fetch the issue & locate the design doc

• mcp__GitHub__get_issue — owner log2n-io, repo Typhon, issue number <N>.
• The issue body MUST link a design doc (under claude/design/). Find that link.
• Read the design doc in full — it is the source of truth for the plan. Read the code it references to verify current state.
• If no design doc is linked, or it cannot be found → stop and ask the user for the design-doc path (this is an impediment — see Impediments). The plan cannot be built without it.

2. Propose the scope

The issue and/or design doc describe the work as a whole and, usually, as numbered phases.

Use AskUserQuestion:

• Question: "What should I implement for #N: ?"
• Header: "Scope"
• Options (multi-select so the user can pick several phases):
  • The whole issue — every phase
  • Phase 1 — <name>, Phase 2 — <name>, … — one option per phase found

If the issue has no phases, the scope is the whole issue — skip the question.

3. Build the implementation plan

From the design doc + the selected scope, construct an implementation plan. The plan MUST contain, for the selected scope (one section per phase when several are chosen):

1. Overview — what this phase/scope delivers and why, in the design doc's terms.
2. Acceptance Criteria — a numbered, checkable list. Completion is defined as every AC met. Each AC must be concrete and verifiable — a specific behavior, API, file, or passing test — never vague.
3. Implementation details — the files, types, and changes mapped to each AC; the approach and the order of work; integration points. Grounded in the design doc. Any deviation from the design MUST be called out explicitly and approved (root CLAUDE.md: never deviate from specs silently).
4. Tests — the tests to write so the feature is proven to work and protected from regression: unit tests per AC, plus integration / Playwright tests where the design calls for them. Follow Typhon test conventions — NUnit, TestBase<T>, scripts/test-affected.py, the 15 s timeout rule, full suite before done (root CLAUDE.md).
5. Code review gate — an explicit final step: before the scope is declared complete, a code review MUST be performed and pass (correctness, AC coverage, quality, adherence to .editorconfig + CLAUDE.md standards, no rules/ invariant violated).

Draft the plan and present it for approval using plan mode — call ExitPlanMode with the full plan. Implementation must not begin until the user approves the plan. If the user requests changes, revise and re-present.

Once approved, post the accepted plan as a comment on the issue (durable record; /complete-task reads it later).

4. Prepare the workspace

After the plan is approved:

• Ensure an issue branch exists. If not, follow the /start-task branch conventions: feature/<N>-short-name from main, plus the matching branch in the nested claude/ repo.
• Set the issue's project Status → In Progress (item lookup + field IDs: see .claude/skills/_helpers.md and /start-task).

5. Develop autonomously

Implement the plan in full autonomy. The approved plan is your mandate — work through the Acceptance Criteria in order, writing each AC's code and its tests together.

• Do not pause for confirmation on routine decisions (naming, small structure, obvious trade-offs) — make the reasonable call per the design and keep going.
• After each AC, run the affected tests: python3 scripts/test-affected.py <files> (15 s timeout).
• Hold to Typhon conventions throughout — .editorconfig, no LINQ on hot paths, [LoggerMessage], no nullable reference types, etc. (root CLAUDE.md).
• Track progress with TaskCreate / TaskUpdate — one task per Acceptance Criterion, marked completed as each is met.

Stop only for an important impediment — see below.

6. Verify

• Once unit-green, run the full suite once: dotnet test test/Typhon.Engine.Tests/Typhon.Engine.Tests.csproj -c Debug --no-build.
• Confirm every Acceptance Criterion is met — list each AC with its evidence (the test that proves it, the observable behavior).
• For UI / Workbench work, exercise the feature in a browser (/wb-dev) — type checks and tests verify code, not feature correctness.

7. Code review — mandatory gate

Before declaring completion, a code review MUST happen and pass:

• Self-review the full diff against the Acceptance Criteria, the design doc, and the Typhon coding standards.
• If a PR exists, run /review; run /security-review for security-sensitive changes; consider /simplify on the changed code.
• If the review surfaces issues, fix them and re-review. Completion is blocked until the review passes.

8. Complete

• Report: each Acceptance Criterion + its evidence, the tests added, the code-review outcome. Explicitly list any AC not met and why (root CLAUDE.md plan discipline).
• Update artifacts: check the implemented phase checkbox(es) on the issue; update the design doc status.
• Close out via /complete-subtask (per phase) or /complete-task (whole issue) — these update the project board and parent checkboxes.
• Never commit — per project convention the user owns all git commits. Announce "ready for review + commit" and hand off; do not block on it.

Impediments — when to stop

Develop autonomously, but STOP and talk to the user the moment an important impediment arises that compromises completion. Examples:

• The design doc is missing, contradicts the issue, or is silent on something load-bearing.
• An Acceptance Criterion cannot be met as specified.
• A required dependency, API, or a prior phase the work depends on is missing or broken.
• Implementation reveals the design itself is wrong or infeasible.
• The only way forward would violate a rules/ correctness invariant or a coding standard, with no clean path.

When this happens: stop. Do not hack around it. Clearly state the impediment, the options you see, and your recommendation — then engage the user in conversation to find a solution together. Resume autonomous development once it is resolved.

Routine ambiguity (naming, minor structure, small trade-offs) is not an impediment — make the reasonable call and continue.