/planning-workflow
7-step planning workflow for pre-implementation design. Enforced by plan_gate hook, critiqued by plan-critic agent. Use when creating plans, design documents, or architecture decisions before implementation. TRIGGER when: plan, planning, /plan, design document, architecture
$ npx -y skills add akaszubski/autonomous-dev --skill planning-workflow --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/planning-workflow
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
7-step planning workflow for pre-implementation design. Enforced by plan_gate hook, critiqued by plan-critic agent. Use when creating plans, design documents, or architecture decisions before implementation. TRIGGER when: plan, planning, /plan, design document, architecture
SKILL.md
planning-workflow.SKILL.mdname: planning-workflow
description: "7-step planning workflow for pre-implementation design. Enforced by plan_gate hook, critiqued by plan-critic agent. Use when creating plans, design documents, or architecture decisions before implementation. TRIGGER when: plan, planning, /plan, design document, architecture decision. DO NOT TRIGGER when: implementation, coding, testing."
allowed-tools: [Read, Grep, Glob, WebSearch, Bash, Write]
Planning Workflow
A structured 7-step process for creating validated plans before implementation. Plans are critiqued adversarially by the plan-critic agent and enforced by the plan_gate hook.
When to Use
- Before any complex implementation (>3 files or >100 lines)
- When the approach is uncertain or multiple solutions exist
- When the feature touches multiple components
- When scope needs to be explicitly bounded
The 7-Step Workflow
| Step | Name | Description | Tools | |------|------|-------------|-------| | Step 1 | **Problem Statement** | Define WHY this change is needed and WHAT is in scope | Read, Grep | | Step 2 | **Scope Check** | Estimate files affected; halt if >50% drift from initial estimate | Glob, Grep | | Step 3 | **Existing Solutions** | Search codebase + web for prior art before building new | Grep, Glob, WebSearch | | Step 4 | **Minimal Path** | Design the smallest change that achieves the goal | Read | | Step 5 | **Adversarial Critique** | plan-critic agent reviews the plan (min 2 rounds) | plan-critic agent | | Step 6 | **Issue Decomposition** | Break into trackable issues if needed (via /create-issue) | Bash | | Step 7 | **Plan Output** | Write validated plan to .claude/plans/<slug>.md | Write |
Step 1: Problem Statement
Define:
- **WHY** this change is needed (not what, not how)
- **SCOPE** boundary -- what is IN and what is OUT
- **Success criteria** -- how do we know it's done?
Step 2: Scope Check
Estimate the number of files that will be created or modified. If during planning the actual file count exceeds the Step 1 estimate by >50%, halt the workflow and re-scope. This prevents scope creep before it starts.
Step 3: Existing Solutions
Before building anything new, search for existing solutions:
- **Codebase search**: Use Grep and Glob to find similar patterns in the project
- **Web search**: Use WebSearch to find libraries, patterns, or prior art
- **Document findings**: Even if nothing is found, document what was searched
This step prevents reinventing the wheel and catches cases where a library or existing code already solves the problem.
Step 4: Minimal Path
Design the smallest change that achieves the goal:
- What files need to change?
- What is the dependency order?
- What can be deferred to a follow-up?
Step 5: Adversarial Critique
The plan-critic agent reviews the plan across 5 axes:
- Assumption audit
- Scope creep detection
- Existing solution verification
- Minimalism pressure
- Uncertainty flagging
Minimum 2 critique rounds before PROCEED verdict.
Step 6: Issue Decomposition
If the plan involves multiple independent work items, decompose into GitHub issues using /create-issue. Each issue should be independently implementable.
Step 7: Plan Output
Write the final plan to `.claude/plans/<slug>.md` with all required sections.
Plan File Format
# Plan: <Feature Name>
## WHY + SCOPE
Why this change is needed and what is in/out of scope.
## Existing Solutions
What was searched, what was found, why existing solutions do/don't apply.
## Minimal Path
The smallest set of changes to achieve the goal.
## Files to Create/Modify
Ordered list of files with brief description of changes.
## Risks and Unknowns
What might go wrong and how to mitigate.
## Critique History
Summary of plan-critic feedback and resolutions.
Required Plan Sections
Every plan MUST contain these three sections (validated by plan_gate hook):
1. **## WHY + SCOPE** -- Problem definition and boundary 2. **## Existing Solutions** -- Prior art search results 3. **## Minimal Path** -- Smallest viable approach
Verdicts
The plan-critic agent issues one of three verdicts:
| Verdict | Meaning | Action | |---------|---------|--------| | **PROCEED** | Plan is adequate | Continue to implementation | | **REVISE** | Plan has fixable issues | Address feedback and re-submit | | **BLOCKED** | Fundamental problems | Rethink the approach |
Escape Hatches
- `SKIP_PLAN_CHECK=1` environment variable disables the plan_gate hook
- Simple edits (<100 lines) are never blocked by the hook
- Documentation files (.md, CHANGELOG, README) are always exempt
Read more
name: planning-workflow description: "7-step planning workflow for pre-implementation design. Enforced by plan_gate hook, critiqued by plan-critic agent. Use when creating plans, design documents, or architecture decisions before implementation. TRIGGER when: plan, planning, /plan, design document, architecture decision. DO NOT TRIGGER when: implementation, coding, testing." allowed-tools: [Read, Grep, Glob, WebSearch, Bash, Write]
Planning Workflow
A structured 7-step process for creating validated plans before implementation. Plans are critiqued adversarially by the plan-critic agent and enforced by the plan_gate hook.
When to Use
- Before any complex implementation (>3 files or >100 lines)
- When the approach is uncertain or multiple solutions exist
- When the feature touches multiple components
- When scope needs to be explicitly bounded
The 7-Step Workflow
| Step | Name | Description | Tools | |------|------|-------------|-------| | Step 1 | **Problem Statement** | Define WHY this change is needed and WHAT is in scope | Read, Grep | | Step 2 | **Scope Check** | Estimate files affected; halt if >50% drift from initial estimate | Glob, Grep | | Step 3 | **Existing Solutions** | Search codebase + web for prior art before building new | Grep, Glob, WebSearch | | Step 4 | **Minimal Path** | Design the smallest change that achieves the goal | Read | | Step 5 | **Adversarial Critique** | plan-critic agent reviews the plan (min 2 rounds) | plan-critic agent | | Step 6 | **Issue Decomposition** | Break into trackable issues if needed (via /create-issue) | Bash | | Step 7 | **Plan Output** | Write validated plan to .claude/plans/<slug>.md | Write |
Step 1: Problem Statement
Define:
- **WHY** this change is needed (not what, not how)
- **SCOPE** boundary -- what is IN and what is OUT
- **Success criteria** -- how do we know it's done?
Step 2: Scope Check
Estimate the number of files that will be created or modified. If during planning the actual file count exceeds the Step 1 estimate by >50%, halt the workflow and re-scope. This prevents scope creep before it starts.
Step 3: Existing Solutions
Before building anything new, search for existing solutions:
- **Codebase search**: Use Grep and Glob to find similar patterns in the project
- **Web search**: Use WebSearch to find libraries, patterns, or prior art
- **Document findings**: Even if nothing is found, document what was searched
This step prevents reinventing the wheel and catches cases where a library or existing code already solves the problem.
Step 4: Minimal Path
Design the smallest change that achieves the goal:
- What files need to change?
- What is the dependency order?
- What can be deferred to a follow-up?
Step 5: Adversarial Critique
The plan-critic agent reviews the plan across 5 axes:
- Assumption audit
- Scope creep detection
- Existing solution verification
- Minimalism pressure
- Uncertainty flagging
Minimum 2 critique rounds before PROCEED verdict.
Step 6: Issue Decomposition
If the plan involves multiple independent work items, decompose into GitHub issues using /create-issue. Each issue should be independently implementable.
Step 7: Plan Output
Write the final plan to `.claude/plans/<slug>.md` with all required sections.
Plan File Format
# Plan: <Feature Name> ## WHY + SCOPE Why this change is needed and what is in/out of scope. ## Existing Solutions What was searched, what was found, why existing solutions do/don't apply. ## Minimal Path The smallest set of changes to achieve the goal. ## Files to Create/Modify Ordered list of files with brief description of changes. ## Risks and Unknowns What might go wrong and how to mitigate. ## Critique History Summary of plan-critic feedback and resolutions.
Required Plan Sections
Every plan MUST contain these three sections (validated by plan_gate hook):
1. **## WHY + SCOPE** -- Problem definition and boundary 2. **## Existing Solutions** -- Prior art search results 3. **## Minimal Path** -- Smallest viable approach
Verdicts
The plan-critic agent issues one of three verdicts:
| Verdict | Meaning | Action | |---------|---------|--------| | **PROCEED** | Plan is adequate | Continue to implementation | | **REVISE** | Plan has fixable issues | Address feedback and re-submit | | **BLOCKED** | Fundamental problems | Rethink the approach |
Escape Hatches
- `SKIP_PLAN_CHECK=1` environment variable disables the plan_gate hook
- Simple edits (<100 lines) are never blocked by the hook
- Documentation files (.md, CHANGELOG, README) are always exempt
A harness that wraps Claude Code with enforcement, specialist agents, and alignment gates to deliver consistent, production-grade software engineering outcomes.
Repo: akaszubski/autonomous-dev
Other skills on autonomous-dev.
- /api-design
REST API design best practices covering versioning, error handling, pagination, and OpenAPI documentation. Use when designing or implementing REST APIs or HTTP endpoints. TRIGGER when: API design, REST endpoint, HTTP route, OpenAPI, swagger, pagination. DO NOT TRIGGER when:
Open skill - /api-integration-patterns
Subprocess safety, GitHub CLI integration, retry logic, authentication, rate limiting, and timeout handling. Use when integrating external APIs or CLI tools. TRIGGER when: subprocess, gh cli, API call, retry logic, rate limiting, authentication. DO NOT TRIGGER when: internal
Open skill - /architecture-patterns
File-by-file architecture planning with ADR format, dependency ordering, and testability gates. Use when designing system architecture or creating ADRs. TRIGGER when: architecture plan, system design, ADR, file breakdown, component design. DO NOT TRIGGER when: simple config
Open skill - /code-review
10-point code review checklist covering correctness, tests, error handling, type hints, naming, security, and performance. Use when reviewing PRs or evaluating code quality. TRIGGER when: code review, PR review, review checklist, code quality check. DO NOT TRIGGER when: writing
Open skill - /content-allocation
One topic, one home. Routes content to its canonical store (CLAUDE.md, PROJECT.md, MEMORY.md, docs/, memory/) and audits for duplication. TRIGGER when: auditing CLAUDE.md/PROJECT.md/MEMORY.md sizes, deduplicating docs, applying the content-allocation pattern to a new repo,
Open skill - /debugging-workflow
Systematic debugging methodology — reproduce, isolate, bisect, fix, verify. Use when diagnosing failures, tracing errors, or investigating unexpected behavior. TRIGGER when: debug, error, traceback, stack trace, bisect, breakpoint, failing test, unexpected behavior. DO NOT
Open skill

