| name | structured-rpi |
| description | Plan risky or ambiguous work before implementing. Use when refactoring, designing unclear features, comparing approaches, or needing user checkpoints. |
| metadata | {"last_updated":"2026-05-15","verified_against":"current local skill refresh"} |
Structured RPI
A lightweight Research → Plan → Implement workflow for work where jumping straight to code is risky.
When to Use
Use for:
- Multi-file refactors
- Unclear feature requirements
- Architecture or API design choices
- Changes with migration, data, security, or compatibility risk
- User asks to plan, think through, compare options, or checkpoint
Skip for obvious bug fixes, one-file edits, or "just do it" requests.
Workflow
- Research — Inspect relevant code/docs and identify constraints.
- Plan — Propose the smallest safe path with acceptance criteria.
- Checkpoint — Ask for approval only when the approach is ambiguous, risky, or user-requested.
- Implement — Make the changes in focused steps.
- Verify — Run targeted validation and report remaining risks.
Output Shape
Keep artifacts short:
## Findings
- ...
## Plan
1. ...
2. ...
## Risks / Decisions
- ...
Rules
- Do not force six phases when three bullets would do.
- Ask clarifying questions only when blocked.
- Prefer concrete files, commands, and acceptance criteria over abstract process.
- Compress or skip phases when requirements are already clear.
References
