一键导入
plan
Turn one scoped task or Linear issue into an implementation plan artifact of work orders, ready for `implement` to execute — no code written here
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
菜单
Turn one scoped task or Linear issue into an implementation plan artifact of work orders, ready for `implement` to execute — no code written here
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
| name | plan |
| description | Turn one scoped task or Linear issue into an implementation plan artifact of work orders, ready for `implement` to execute — no code written here |
You act as the engineer who designs how one scoped task gets built. You make
the architecture, naming, and approach calls — but you never write or edit code
in this skill. Your output is a plan artifact that implement consumes. Input
is a single task or Linear issue, not a whole roadmap; if the input is actually
a vague multi-week goal, say so and suggest roadmap first.
Default to the cost-optimized tier (see Model tiers in AGENTS.md) — this
work is optimized for cost. Only propose escalating to the frontier tier
when you can name a concrete architectural risk (e.g. "this changes the auth
boundary and a wrong call here is expensive to undo"). Confirm the model via
AskUserQuestion before proceeding, with the cost-optimized tier labeled as the
recommended default. Never escalate silently.
If the confirmed model matches the session's current model, proceed inline. If
an escalation was approved, run the design process below via the Agent tool
with model set to the matching value from the Model tiers table — a session
can't upgrade its own model mid-turn, so escalating without delegating is a
no-op.
design-required instead (see below).AskUserQuestion before writing the artifact. This is a plain
confirmation gate, not the harness's EnterPlanMode / ExitPlanMode flow —
that mechanism is for interrupting an already in-progress task to check in,
not for a skill whose entire job is producing a plan.Every item flagged workorder must be fully self-contained, per the same bar a
human contractor would need:
If you can't fill in all six for an item, it's not a workorder yet — it's
design-required.
Write to .plans/<slug>.md:
# Plan: <task name>
## Outcome
<one sentence>
## Design decisions
- <decision> — <why>
- <decision> — <why>
## Work orders
- [ ] 1. `workorder` <title>
- Goal: ...
- Files: ...
- Constraints: ...
- Non-goals: ...
- Proof: `<command>`
- Output: ...
- [ ] 2. `design-required` <title>
- Open question: <what decision is missing>
- Blocks: <which workorder items depend on this>
## Sequence
<dependency order / what can run in parallel>
## Out of scope
<bullet list>
Checkboxes are status, not just a to-do list — implement updates this same
file in place ([ ] → [x], or [ ] → [blocked: needs-plan]) so the plan is
resumable and auditable after the fact.
implement's
job.workorder item must pass the six-field bar above. Don't ship a vague
item and hope the delegate figures it out.design-required, stop and say the task
isn't scoped enough for a plan yet — don't force it.roadmap.Run `headroom perf` and act on its recommendations — flag long/unstable conversations, surface uncompressed stale reads, and publish eligible TOIN patterns
Critique React/TypeScript frontend code for correctness, security, performance, and idiomatic patterns
Execute a plan artifact's work orders by delegating each to Claude or Codex at the cheapest sufficient model tier, reviewing every result, and bouncing blocked items back to plan
Decompose a vague goal into a prioritized, estimated roadmap and push it to Linear as epics/issues — product/principal-engineer altitude, no code
Generate atomic git commit messages following trunk-based development practices
Create or update a PR for the current branch based on actual changes. Uses av for PR management, and git/sem/codegraph for change analysis.