Plan

Plan

You are turning design intent into an executable phase plan.

Inputs:

• slice-nnn.md (scope)
• design.md (canonical design reference)
• existing plan.toml / plan.md (when present)

Process

1. Read the slice scope and design.md together.
2. Confirm planning is not getting ahead of design:
   • if design.md is missing or blank, stop and run /design unless you have been explicitly instructed otherwise.
   • if design.md exists but is stale relative to the current ask or slice scope, reconcile the design first. Clarify with the user if ambiguous.
   • you MUST NOT treat plan or phase creation as a substitute for unresolved design.
   • if planning surfaces substantive new design problems, run /design to revise or append to the design before continuing.
   • re-grep before you trust the design's premises. The design was locked at author-time; the tree has moved since. Scan design.md for concrete, grep-pable references — file paths, function/type names, constants, config keys — and resolve each against the current tree (grep, ls, git show). A missing path, moved file, or renamed symbol means the design rests on a stale premise: STOP and run /design to reconcile it before scaffolding phase sheets against wrong paths. (A design that names nothing concrete has nothing to check — this costs only what the design asserts.)
   • check the research advisory (doctrine slice research <id>), then draft the slice's selectors from its Thread 2 hotspot map rather than from recall — the design-time selector dry-run is only the checking half.
3. Scaffold the plan: doctrine slice plan <ID> writes plan.toml + plan.md (refuses to clobber existing files). The tool reads these but never rewrites them — hand-edit freely.
4. Author plan.toml — one [[phase]] per ordered phase:

   • id is PHASE-NN (zero-padded), immutable and never reused — edits append, they never renumber.

   • name and objective for the phase.

   • entrance_criteria (EN-n), exit_criteria (EX-n), and verification. Verification ids carry their mode: VT-n verified by test, VA-n by agent, VH-n by human — use VA/VH when a test cannot judge the criterion, so it is still checked downstream rather than silently skipped. These ids are local to the phase and equally immutable.

   • Structured VT mandate (NON-NEGOTIABLE). Every VT-n row MUST carry at minimum test_file + keywords so the S3 gate has signal. Without them verify-vt reports UNCHECKABLE — the gate is inert project-wide (IMP-209). Write the mandate in the TOML row, not prose:

     { id = "VT-1",
       expects = "round-trip unit: the new fn parses, renders, and re-parses",
       test_file = "src/plan.rs",
       keywords = ["Plan::parse", "PlanPhase"],
       patterns = ["^\\s*pub fn"],   # optional: stronger line-anchored shape
       waived = false }
     

     • test_file — the ONE file where the keywords will actually appear (the production source or a test file the phase touches). The mandate carries a single test_file; all keywords must live in that one file. Pick the file that the phase changes, or the test file that exercises it — not both. This must be a path that will exist after the phase lands, not a future file.
     • keywords — raw substrings that MUST appear in that file after the phase lands. They are the proportionate floor: plain substring match over the raw source (POL-002 — no comment/string stripping).
     • patterns (optional) — line-anchored regex for a stronger language-agnostic shape assertion. The author owns the regex.
     • waived — escape valve with a mandatory waived_reason.

     doctrine slice verify-vt <id> gates every VT mandate at dispatch conclude/handover (S6), not at audit. A test_file with no keywords passes vacuously — the keyword floor is what gives the gate teeth, not the file alone.

   • specs / requirements stay empty in v1 (no registry yet). When a slice does carry relations, they are written with doctrine link (not typed keys here) — see using-doctrine.md § Relating entities.

5. Author plan.md — the rationale and sequencing prose: why these phases, in this order, with these boundaries. Honour the storage rule: no queried or derived data in plan.md; the structured criteria live in plan.toml, and runtime progress lives under .doctrine/state/, never here.
6. Commit.
7. Consider plan critically: what's under-specified, assumed, ambiguous, oversized, optimistic, requires verification, or presents implementation risk? For each of these, decide what new information is needed, or what mitigations to put in place. Ground the plan in known details of the implementation.
8. Plan the revision; print a summary of it for the user. Then work through it.
9. Revise the plan; commit again. Summarise what changed.
10. Materialise phase tracking: doctrine slice phases <ID> creates the per-phase sheets in the state tree from plan.toml. --prune removes orphan tracking whose plan phase is gone (destructive — only when you meant to drop a phase).
11. Hand off to /phase-plan to expand the next phase's runtime phase sheet just before execution — then /execute. Do this only after slice scope, design.md, and the plan tell the same story. Record the lifecycle move on handoff: doctrine slice status <id> ready (bare number).

Outcomes

• plan.toml is execution-ready: every phase has an objective and EN/EX criteria plus verification in an explicit mode (VT/VA/VH).
• plan.md explains the rationale and sequencing.
• A runtime phase sheet exists per phase with clear done criteria.
• If plan complexity or policy ambiguity emerges, STOP and /consult.