360 Secure SkillHub
360 安全技能中心

writing-plans

该 Skill 指导编写面向“零上下文工程师”的实施计划:规定计划保存路径、文档头部模板,以及 2-5 分钟粒度的任务步骤(写失败测试、验证失败、最小实现、验证通过、提交),要求给出精确文件路径、完整代码与预期命令输出,保存后再让用户选择子代理驱动或另开会话执行。只生成计划文档,不执行其中的测试或提交命令。

obra
热度 0.00
最近更新 2026-10-18 17:20:01
分类:开发依赖:读写文件 / 内部调用大模型应用场景:工作流 / 任务管理 / 模板

安装技能

复制下面的话术发给你的 Agent,它会通过 secure-skills 检索并安装该技能。

执行命令安装此 skill: npx secure-skills-cli add obra/superpowers-skills/writing-plans
Metadata
name
Writing Plans
description
Create detailed implementation plans with bite-sized tasks for engineers with zero codebase context
when_to_use
when design is complete and you need detailed implementation tasks for engineers with zero codebase context
version
2.1.0

Writing Plans

Overview

Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for our codebase and questionable taste. Document everything they need to know: which files to touch for each task, code, testing, docs they might need to check, how to test it. Give them the whole plan as bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.

Assume they are a skilled developer, but know almost nothing about our toolset or problem domain. Assume they don't know good test design very well.

Announce at start: "I'm using the Writing Plans skill to create the implementation plan."

Context: This should be run in a dedicated worktree (created by brainstorming skill).

Save plans to: docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<feature-name>.md

Bite-Sized Task Granularity

Each step is one action (2-5 minutes):

  • "Write the failing test" - step
  • "Run it to make sure it fails" - step
  • "Implement the minimal code to make the test pass" - step
  • "Run the tests and make sure they pass" - step
  • "Commit" - step

Plan Document Header

Every plan MUST start with this header:

# [Feature Name] Implementation Plan

> **For Claude:** Use `${SUPERPOWERS_SKILLS_ROOT}/skills/collaboration/executing-plans/SKILL.md` to implement this plan task-by-task.

**Goal:** [One sentence describing what this builds]

**Architecture:** [2-3 sentences about approach]

**Tech Stack:** [Key technologies/libraries]

---

Task Structure

### Task N: [Component Name]

**Files:**
- Create: `exact/path/to/file.py`
- Modify: `exact/path/to/existing.py:123-145`
- Test: `tests/exact/path/to/test.py`

**Step 1: Write the failing test**

```python
def test_specific_behavior():
    result = function(input)
    assert result == expected

Step 2: Run test to verify it fails

Run: pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v Expected: FAIL with "function not defined"

Step 3: Write minimal implementation

def function(input):
    return expected

Step 4: Run test to verify it passes

Run: pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v Expected: PASS

Step 5: Commit

git add tests/path/test.py src/path/file.py
git commit -m "feat: add specific feature"

## Remember
- Exact file paths always
- Complete code in plan (not "add validation")
- Exact commands with expected output
- Reference relevant skills with @ syntax
- DRY, YAGNI, TDD, frequent commits

## Execution Handoff

After saving the plan, offer execution choice:

**"Plan complete and saved to `docs/plans/<filename>.md`. Two execution options:**

**1. Subagent-Driven (this session)** - I dispatch fresh subagent per task, review between tasks, fast iteration

**2. Parallel Session (separate)** - Open new session with executing-plans, batch execution with checkpoints

**Which approach?"**

**If Subagent-Driven chosen:**
- Use skills/collaboration/subagent-driven-development
- Stay in this session
- Fresh subagent per task + code review

**If Parallel Session chosen:**
- Guide them to open new session in worktree
- New session uses skills/collaboration/executing-plans