Update implementation plan
Skill GulajavaMinistudio/awesome-copilot-id/supplementary-skill/update-implementation-plan
A curated collection of custom agents, skills, rules, and prompts for GitHub Copilot, Google Antigravity, OpenCode, ChatGPT Codex, and Oh My Pi. Tailored for Indonesian developers to streamline SDLC workflows with AI.
npx -y skills add GulajavaMinistudio/awesome-copilot-id --skill update-implementation-planAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Update an existing implementation plan file with new or update requirements to provide new features, refactoring existing code or upgrading packages, design, architecture or infrastructure.
SKILL.md
6.4 KB, ~1.4k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Update Implementation Plan
Primary Directive
You are an AI agent tasked with updating the implementation plan file ${file} based on new or updated requirements. Your output must be machine-readable, deterministic, and structured for autonomous execution by other AI systems or humans.
Execution Context
This prompt is designed for AI-to-AI communication and automated processing. All instructions must be interpreted literally and executed systematically without human interpretation or clarification.
Core Requirements
- Generate implementation plans that are fully executable by AI agents or humans
- Use deterministic language with zero ambiguity
- Structure all content for automated parsing and execution
- Ensure complete self-containment with no external dependencies for understanding
Plan Structure Requirements
Plans must consist of discrete, atomic phases containing executable tasks. Each phase must be independently processable by AI agents or humans without cross-phase dependencies unless explicitly declared.
Phase Architecture
- Each phase must have measurable completion criteria
- Tasks within phases must be executable in parallel unless dependencies are specified
- All task descriptions must include specific file paths, function names, and exact implementation details
- No task should require human interpretation or decision-making
AI-Optimized Implementation Standards
- Use explicit, unambiguous language with zero interpretation required
- Structure all content as machine-parseable formats (tables, lists, structured data)
- Include specific file paths, line numbers, and exact code references where applicable
- Define all variables, constants, and configuration values explicitly
- Provide complete context within each task description
- Use standardized prefixes for all identifiers (REQ-, TASK-, etc.)
- Include validation criteria that can be automatically verified
Output File Specifications
- Save implementation plan files in
/plan/directory - Use naming convention:
[purpose]-[component]-[version].md - Purpose prefixes:
upgrade|refactor|feature|data|infrastructure|process|architecture|design - Example:
upgrade-system-command-4.md,feature-auth-module-1.md - File must be valid Markdown with proper front matter structure
Mandatory Template Structure
All implementation plans must strictly adhere to the following template. Each section is required and must be populated with specific, actionable content. AI agents must validate template compliance before execution.
Template Validation Rules
- All front matter fields must be present and properly formatted
- All section headers must match exactly (case-sensitive)
- All identifier prefixes must follow the specified format
- Tables must include all required columns
- No placeholder text may remain in the final output
Status
The status of the implementation plan must be clearly defined in the front matter and must reflect the current state of the plan. The status can be one of the following (status_color in brackets): Completed (bright green badge), In progress (yellow badge), Planned (blue badge), Deprecated (red badge), or On Hold (orange badge). It should also be displayed as a badge in the introduction section.
---
goal: [Concise Title Describing the Package Implementation Plan's Goal]
version: [Optional: e.g., 1.0, Date]
date_created: [YYYY-MM-DD]
last_updated: [Optional: YYYY-MM-DD]
owner: [Optional: Team/Individual responsible for this spec]
status: 'Completed'|'In progress'|'Planned'|'Deprecated'|'On Hold'
tags: [Optional: List of relevant tags or categories, e.g., `feature`, `upgrade`, `chore`, `architecture`, `migration`, `bug` etc]
---
# Introduction

[A short concise introduction to the plan and the goal it is intended to achieve.]
## 1. Requirements & Constraints
[Explicitly list all requirements & constraints that affect the plan and constrain how it is implemented. Use bullet points or tables for clarity.]
- **REQ-001**: Requirement 1
- **SEC-001**: Security Requirement 1
- **[3 LETTERS]-001**: Other Requirement 1
- **CON-001**: Constraint 1
- **GUD-001**: Guideline 1
- **PAT-001**: Pattern to follow 1
## 2. Implementation Steps
### Implementation Phase 1
- GOAL-001: [Describe the goal of this phase, e.g., "Implement feature X", "Refactor module Y", etc.]
| Task | Description | Completed | Date |
| -------- | --------------------- | --------- | ---------- |
| TASK-001 | Description of task 1 | ✅ | 2025-04-25 |
| TASK-002 | Description of task 2 | | |
| TASK-003 | Description of task 3 | | |
### Implementation Phase 2
- GOAL-002: [Describe the goal of this phase, e.g., "Implement feature X", "Refactor module Y", etc.]
| Task | Description | Completed | Date |
| -------- | --------------------- | --------- | ---- |
| TASK-004 | Description of task 4 | | |
| TASK-005 | Description of task 5 | | |
| TASK-006 | Description of task 6 | | |
## 3. Alternatives
[A bullet point list of any alternative approaches that were considered and why they were not chosen. This helps to provide context and rationale for the chosen approach.]
- **ALT-001**: Alternative approach 1
- **ALT-002**: Alternative approach 2
## 4. Dependencies
[List any dependencies that need to be addressed, such as libraries, frameworks, or other components that the plan relies on.]
- **DEP-001**: Dependency 1
- **DEP-002**: Dependency 2
## 5. Files
[List the files that will be affected by the feature or refactoring task.]
- **FILE-001**: Description of file 1
- **FILE-002**: Description of file 2
## 6. Testing
[List the tests that need to be implemented to verify the feature or refactoring task.]
- **TEST-001**: Description of test 1
- **TEST-002**: Description of test 2
## 7. Risks & Assumptions
[List any risks or assumptions related to the implementation of the plan.]
- **RISK-001**: Risk 1
- **ASSUMPTION-001**: Assumption 1
## 8. Related Specifications / Further Reading
[Link to related spec 1]
[Link to relevant external documentation]
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most plan spec skills give in ~1.4k tokens
Counted across 1,099 of the 1,860 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-07
- ask one question at a timein 51 of 1099
- Break plans into vertical slicesin 29 of 1099, across 11 files
- Publish issues in dependency orderin 27 of 1099, across 9 files
- Iterate until user approves the breakdownin 25 of 1099, across 7 files
- Explore the repository to understand the codebase statein 24 of 1099, across 7 files
- Use domain glossary vocabularyin 23 of 1099, across 5 files
- Apply correct triage labels to published issuesin 23 of 1099, across 5 files
- prefer AFK slices over HITLin 22 of 1099, across 7 files
- write a specification before writing any codein 22 of 1099, across 14 files
- Write failing tests before implementation codein 22 of 1099, across 20 files
- ask clarifying questions until requirements are concretein 21 of 1099, across 13 files
- Respect existing architecture decision recordsin 20 of 1099, across 5 files
Said here and by no other author read
- use machine-parseable formats
- include automatically verifiable validation criteria
- name files using purpose-component-version format
- include valid front matter
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.