agentsclimarketplace

Plan feature from issue

Skill gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/skills/plan-feature-from-issue

Stack-agnostic agentic-programming workflow skills + documentation scaffold

Install
npx -y skills add gtrabanco/agentic-workflow --skill plan-feature-from-issue

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 19 stars19 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Internal step of plan-feature: turn a feature-request issue into a scoped, sized, roadmap-mapped SPEC **product half** (capability closure satisfied) with Closes #N traceability.

The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.

SKILL.md

6.7 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Plan Feature — From Issue (internal)

Convert a feature-request issue into the project's planning artifacts, keeping a clean issue → SPEC → PR(Closes #n) trace. Writes the SPEC's product half (same two-halves convention design-feature uses) and must satisfy capability closure before handing off — a thin issue does not get a shortcut around it.

When to use

  • The plan-feature router calls this when the input is a GitHub issue (or --from-issue N) that describes new product capability.

If the issue is a bug or tech-debt, stop and route it: triage-issue to classify, then plan-fix + execute-phase --fix. This skill is for genuine features only.

Step 0 — Discover the project (always first)

Per the agent guide's Workflow conventions + documentation map, then read what THIS skill needs: the feature SPEC template, the roadmap, and the issue/PR templates (.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/, .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md) so the SPEC mirrors the fields reviewers expect. Then read the issue (forge CLI per the project's Workflow conventions — examples use gh):

gh issue view <N> --json number,title,body,labels,state,comments

Process

  1. Classify first. Confirm it is a feature. Not a feature if it describes a defect, regression, duplicated code, perf debt, or carries a "when to fix / trigger" clause → hand to triage-issue. State the verdict explicitly.

  2. Normalize language. If not in the project's docs language (this repo: English), translate before drafting any artifact.

  3. Map to the roadmap. Assign the next number + slug. Identify dependencies and conflicts with existing features, coupling/migration risks, and whether it should instead extend an existing feature.

  4. Close product-half gaps proactively. Compare the issue against what a complete SPEC product half needs (goals, scope in/out, business goals, i18n/SEO/a11y/pricing per the docs map, a UI design reference when the feature has a UI surface), probing the same fixed vagueness rubric design-feature's interview uses: affected users/roles · error & edge states · data shape · boundaries & limits · out of scope · success criteria — each slot filled or explicit n/a: <reason>. For each genuine gap you can't safely default, ask the user one question per turn, never batched, each with a recommended default; never ask what the issue or docs already answer. Structural hand-off threshold: if ≥ 3 rubric slots remain unfillable from the issue plus the answers so far, stop and hand the feature to design-feature (the thin-issue rule below, now with a fixed trigger) instead of continuing to interview here.

  5. Satisfy capability closure. Walk the same fixed checklist design-feature uses (per entity: CRUD + state transitions, each with UI + API + test, or explicit n/a: <reason>; per capability: entry point + ACL; per role: assigned/revoked/viewed where) into the SPEC's ## Capability closure and ## Acceptance criteria. A thin issue that doesn't carry enough to fill it is not a shortcut around the gate — hand it to design-feature (compose in-turn only at ≥ this skill's tier, per Guardrails; otherwise hand off with run /design-feature <slug> and stop here) rather than stamping designed on a hollow closure.

  6. Size it. Estimate XS / S / M / L (scale defined in the SPEC template) and record it in the SPEC. XS/S → the SPEC is the only planning artifact (single-pass execution); M/L → full artifact set. If L, propose splitting.

  7. Produce the SPEC product half. Fill it and stamp ## Design status: designed once closure is complete; set the roadmap row (added at idea first if it didn't exist) to defined in the same edit — the same idea → defined transition design-feature owns, performed here when this skill is the one that satisfies closure. The plan-feature router then runs plan-feature-scaffold for the engineering half + defined → planned roadmap promotion.

  8. Wire traceability. Record #N in the SPEC; the PR body must include Closes #N so the issue closes on merge.

  9. Hand off — return exactly (fixed completion report, back to the router):

    ISSUE #<N> → SPEC <slug> — size: <XS|S|M|L>
    Verdict: feature (not bug/debt — else this would have routed to triage-issue)
    Gaps closed: <n> asked / <n> defaulted (logged)   Closure: designed | handed to design-feature
    Traceability: Closes #<N> wired
    → scaffold next (plan-feature-scaffold)
    

Guardrails

  • Don't silently expand scope beyond the issue — surface additions as proposals.
  • Don't open the feature branch or write code here.
  • Keep the Closes #N link; an issue-born feature must close it.
  • Never stamp ## Design status: designed with a blank Capability closure row — the same rule design-feature follows; a thin issue hands off instead of faking closure.
  • Composition tier. Composing design-feature in-turn for a thin issue is allowed only when this skill is running at ≥ design-feature's tier (planning-class — strongest model / highest effort); otherwise hand off (run /design-feature <slug>) rather than under-power it.
  • Otherwise honor the project's Workflow conventions (branch/PR, docs-language).

Relationship to other skills

  • triage-issue — decides bug vs feature vs defer; call it if unsure.
  • plan-fix — the fix-side sibling for bug/debt issues.
  • design-feature — receives thin issues this skill cannot safely close capability closure for; both write the SPEC's product half in the same format.
  • plan-feature-scaffold — fills the engineering half once the product half is designed.
  • execute-phase — executes the phases; its PR carries Closes #N.

Done when

  • A filled SPEC product half + planning artifacts exist, roadmap-registered.
  • Capability closure is satisfied (or the issue was handed off to design-feature instead of faking it) and ## Design status is accurate.
  • The roadmap row status is defined (added at idea first if new) whenever ## Design status: designed was stamped — never defined on a hollow closure, never left at idea once designed is stamped.
  • #N is recorded and the PR plan includes Closes #N.
  • Scope gaps were resolved with the user, not assumed.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.