Plan
by @fortunto2
Explore codebase and create spec + phased implementation plan with file-level task breakdown. Use when user says "plan this feature", "create implementation...
clawhub install solo-planπ About This Skill
name: solo-plan description: Explore codebase and create spec + phased implementation plan with file-level task breakdown. Use when user says "plan this feature", "create implementation plan", "write a spec", "battle plan", or describes a feature/bug/refactor. Zero questions β researches code instead. Do NOT use for idea validation (use /validate) or execution (use /build). license: MIT metadata: author: fortunto2 version: "2.2.1" openclaw: emoji: "π" allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Bash, Glob, Write, Edit, AskUserQuestion, mcp__solograph__session_search, mcp__solograph__project_code_search, mcp__solograph__codegraph_query, mcp__solograph__codegraph_explain, mcp__solograph__kb_search, mcp__solograph__web_search, mcp__context7__resolve-library-id, mcp__context7__query-docs argument-hint: "
/plan
This skill is self-contained β follow the steps below instead of delegating to external planning skills (superpowers, etc.).
Research the codebase and create a spec + phased implementation plan. Zero interactive questions β explores the code instead.
When to use
Creates a track for any feature, bug fix, or refactor with a concrete, file-level implementation plan. Works with or without /setup.
MCP Tools (use if available)
session_search(query) β find similar past work in Claude Code chat historyproject_code_search(query, project) β find reusable code across projectscodegraph_query(query) β check dependencies of affected filescodegraph_explain(project) β architecture overview: stack, languages, directory layers, key patterns, top dependencies, hub fileskb_search(query) β search knowledge base for relevant methodologyIf MCP tools are not available, fall back to Glob + Grep + Read.
Steps
1. Parse task description from $ARGUMENTS.
- If empty, ask via AskUserQuestion: "What feature, bug, or refactor do you want to plan?"
- This is the ONE question maximum.
2. Detect context β determine where plan files should be stored:
Project context (normal project with code):
- Detected by: package.json, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml, *.xcodeproj, or build.gradle.kts exists in working directory
- Plan path: docs/plan/{trackId}/
Knowledge base context (documentation-centric project):
- Detected by: NO package manifest found, BUT directories like docs/, notes/, or structured numbered directories exist
- Plan path: docs/plan/{shortname}/
- Note: the shortname is derived from the task (kebab-case, no date suffix for the directory)
Set $PLAN_ROOT based on detected context. All subsequent file paths use $PLAN_ROOT.
3. Load project context (parallel reads):
- CLAUDE.md β architecture, constraints, Do/Don't
- docs/prd.md β what the product does (if exists)
- docs/workflow.md β TDD policy, commit strategy (if exists)
- package.json or pyproject.toml β stack, versions, deps
3. Auto-classify track type from keywords in task description:
- Contains "fix", "bug", "broken", "error", "crash" β bug
- Contains "refactor", "cleanup", "reorganize", "migrate" β refactor
- Contains "update", "upgrade", "bump" β chore
- Default β feature
4. Research phase β explore the codebase to understand what needs to change:
a. Get architecture overview (if MCP available β do this FIRST):
codegraph_explain(project="{project name from CLAUDE.md or directory name}")
Gives you: stack, languages, directory layers, key patterns, top dependencies, hub files.b. Find relevant files β Glob + Grep for patterns related to the task: - Search for keywords from the task description - Look at directory structure to understand architecture - Identify files that will need modification
c. Precedent retrieval (context graph pattern β search past solutions BEFORE planning): - Search past sessions (if MCP available):
session_search(query="{task description keywords}")
Look for: how similar tasks were solved, what went wrong, what patterns worked.
- Search KB for relevant methodology:
kb_search(query="{task type}: {keywords}")
Check for: harness patterns, architectural constraints, quality scores.d. Search code across projects (if MCP available):
project_code_search(query="{relevant pattern}")
e. Check dependencies of affected files (if MCP available):
codegraph_query(query="MATCH (f:File {path: '{file}'})-[:IMPORTS]->(dep) RETURN dep.path")
f. Read existing tests in the affected area β understand testing patterns used.
g. Read CLAUDE.md architecture constraints β understand boundaries and conventions.
- Check for harness section: module boundaries, data validation rules, lint configs.
- Read docs/ARCHITECTURE.md and docs/QUALITY_SCORE.md if they exist.
h. Detect deploy infrastructure β search for deploy scripts/configs to include deploy phase in plan:
find . -maxdepth 3 \( -name 'deploy.sh' -o -name 'Dockerfile' -o -name 'docker-compose.yml' -o -name 'fly.toml' -o -name 'wrangler.toml' \) -type f 2>/dev/null
If found, read them to understand deploy targets. Include a deploy phase in the plan with concrete commands.5. Generate track ID:
- Extract a short name (2-3 words, kebab-case) from task description.
- Format: {shortname}_{YYYYMMDD} (e.g., user-auth_20260209).
6. Create track directory:
mkdir -p $PLAN_ROOT
- Project context: docs/plan/{trackId}/
- KB context: docs/plan/{shortname}/7. Generate $PLAN_ROOT/spec.md:
Based on research findings, NOT generic questions.
# Specification: {Title} Track ID: {trackId}
Type: {Feature|Bug|Refactor|Chore}
Created: {YYYY-MM-DD}
Status: Draft
## Summary
{1-2 paragraph description based on research}
## Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] {concrete, testable criterion}
- [ ] {concrete, testable criterion}
{3-8 criteria based on research findings}
## Dependencies
- {external deps, packages, other tracks}
## Out of Scope
- {what this track does NOT cover}
## Technical Notes
- {architecture decisions from research}
- {relevant patterns found in codebase}
- {reusable code from other projects}
8. Generate $PLAN_ROOT/plan.md:
Concrete, file-level plan from research. Keep it tight: 2-4 phases, 5-15 tasks total.
Critical format rules (parsed by /build):
- Phase headers: ## Phase N: Name
- Tasks: - [ ] Task N.Y: Description (with period or detailed text)
- Subtasks: indented - [ ] Subtask description
- All tasks use [ ] (unchecked), [~] (in progress), [x] (done)
# Implementation Plan: {Title} Track ID: {trackId}
Spec: spec.md
Created: {YYYY-MM-DD}
Status: [ ] Not Started
## Overview
{1-2 sentences on approach}
## Phase 1: {Name}
{brief description of phase goal}
### Tasks
- [ ] Task 1.1: {description with concrete file paths}
- [ ] Task 1.2: {description}
### Verification
- [ ] {what to check after this phase}
## Phase 2: {Name}
### Tasks
- [ ] Task 2.1: {description}
- [ ] Task 2.2: {description}
### Verification
- [ ] {verification steps}
{2-4 phases total}
## Phase {N-1}: Deploy (if deploy infrastructure exists)
_Include this phase ONLY if the project has deploy scripts/configs (deploy.sh, Dockerfile, docker-compose.yml, fly.toml, wrangler.toml, vercel.json). Skip if no deploy infra found._
### Tasks
- [ ] Task {N-1}.1: {concrete deploy step β e.g. "Run python/deploy.sh to push Docker image to VPS", "wrangler deploy", etc.}
- [ ] Task {N-1}.2: Verify deployment β health check, logs, HTTP status
### Verification
- [ ] Service is live and healthy
- [ ] No runtime errors in production logs
## Phase {N}: Docs & Cleanup
### Tasks
- [ ] Task {N}.1: Update CLAUDE.md with any new commands, architecture changes, or key files
- [ ] Task {N}.2: Update README.md if public API or setup steps changed
- [ ] Task {N}.3: Remove dead code β unused imports, orphaned files, stale exports
### Verification
- [ ] CLAUDE.md reflects current project state
- [ ] Linter clean, tests pass
## Final Verification
- [ ] All acceptance criteria from spec met
- [ ] Tests pass
- [ ] Linter clean
- [ ] Build succeeds
- [ ] Documentation up to date
---
_Generated by /plan. Tasks marked [~] in progress and [x] complete by /build._
Plan quality rules: - Every task mentions specific file paths (from research). - Tasks are atomic β one commit each. - Phases are independently verifiable. - Total: 5-15 tasks (not 70). - Last phase is always "Docs & Cleanup". - Harness-aware: if the task introduces new patterns, include a task to update lint rules or CLAUDE.md constraints. If it touches module boundaries, include verification of dependency direction. Think: "what harness change prevents future agents from breaking this?"
9. Create progress task list for pipeline visibility:
After writing plan.md, create TaskCreate entries so progress is trackable:
- One task per phase: "Phase 1: {name}" with task list as description.
- This gives the user and pipeline real-time visibility into what's planned.
- /build will update these tasks as it works through them.
If superpowers:writing-plans skill is available, follow its granularity format: bite-sized tasks (2-5 minutes each), complete code in task descriptions, exact file paths, verification steps per task. This enhances the built-in format above.
10. Show plan for approval via AskUserQuestion:
Present the spec summary + plan overview. Options:
- "Approve and start" β ready for /build
- "Edit plan" β user wants to modify before implementing
- "Cancel" β discard the track
If "Edit plan": tell user to edit $PLAN_ROOT/plan.md manually, then run /build.
Output
Track created: {trackId} Type: {Feature|Bug|Refactor|Chore}
Phases: {N}
Tasks: {N}
Spec: $PLAN_ROOT/spec.md
Plan: $PLAN_ROOT/plan.md
Research findings:
- {key finding 1}
- {key finding 2}
- {reusable code found, if any}
Next: /build {trackId}
Rationalizations Catalog
These thoughts mean STOP β you're skipping research:
| Thought | Reality | |---------|---------| | "I know this codebase" | You know what you've seen. Search for what you haven't. | | "The plan is obvious" | Obvious plans miss edge cases. Research first. | | "Let me just start coding" | 10 minutes of research prevents 2 hours of rework. | | "This is a small feature" | Small features touch many files. Map the blast radius. | | "I'll figure it out as I go" | That's not a plan. Write the file paths first. | | "70 tasks should cover it" | 5-15 tasks. If you need more, split into tracks. |
Compatibility Notes
/build parses: ## Phase N:, - [ ] Task N.Y:./build reads docs/workflow.md for TDD policy and commit strategy (if exists).docs/workflow.md missing, /build uses sensible defaults (moderate TDD, conventional commits).Common Issues
Plan has too many tasks
Cause: Feature scope too broad or tasks not atomic enough. Fix: Target 5-15 tasks across 2-4 phases. Split large features into multiple tracks.Context detection wrong (project vs KB)
Cause: Directory has both code manifests and KB-style directories. Fix: Project context takes priority ifpackage.json/pyproject.toml exists.Research phase finds no relevant code
Cause: New project with minimal codebase or MCP tools unavailable. Fix: Skill falls back to Glob + Grep. For new projects, the plan will rely more on CLAUDE.md architecture and stack conventions.β‘ When to Use
Creates a track for any feature, bug fix, or refactor with a concrete, file-level implementation plan. Works with or without /setup.