Writing plans

Writing Plans

Write an implementation plan for an engineer with zero context for this codebase and questionable test taste. Decompose into bite-sized, independently verifiable tasks. DRY, YAGNI, TDD, frequent commits.

Pairs with /generate-prp (research-driven blueprint) and /writing-plans. Save to docs/superpowers/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<feature>.md (user preference overrides). Worktree, if isolated, comes from using-git-worktrees at execution time.

Announce: "Using the writing-plans skill to create the implementation plan."

Scope

• One plan per independent subsystem — each must produce working, testable software alone. If the spec spans several, suggest splitting into separate plans.

File structure (decide before tasks)

• Map every file to create/modify and its single responsibility — this locks in decomposition.
• One responsibility per file; prefer small focused files; files that change together live together (split by responsibility, not layer).
• Follow established codebase patterns. Restructure a file only when it's grown unwieldy AND you're already modifying it.

Task right-sizing

• A task = the smallest unit that carries its own test cycle and is worth a fresh reviewer's gate.
• Fold setup/config/scaffolding/docs into the task whose deliverable needs them. Split only where a reviewer could reject one task while approving its neighbor.
• Each task ends with an independently testable deliverable.

Step granularity

Each step is one 2-5 min action: write failing test → run it (confirm RED) → minimal implementation → run (confirm GREEN) → commit.

Plan document shape

Header (required):

# [Feature] Implementation Plan

> **For agentic workers:** REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: superpowers:subagent-driven-development (recommended) or superpowers:executing-plans. Steps use `- [ ]` checkboxes.

**Goal:** [one sentence]   **Architecture:** [2-3 sentences]   **Tech Stack:** [key libs]

## Global Constraints
[Project-wide spec requirements — version floors, dep limits, naming/copy rules,
platform — one line each, exact values verbatim. Every task implicitly includes this.]

Per task:

• Files — exact Create: / Modify:path:lines / Test: paths.
• Interfaces — Consumes: exact signatures from earlier tasks; Produces: exact names + param/return types later tasks rely on (implementers see only their own task).
• Steps — checkbox per step, with the ACTUAL test code, exact run command + expected output, the ACTUAL implementation code, and the commit.

No placeholders (these are plan failures)

• "TBD"/"TODO"/"implement later"/"fill in details".
• "Add appropriate error handling / validation / edge cases".
• "Write tests for the above" without the test code; "similar to Task N" without repeating the code (tasks may be read out of order).
• Steps describing what without showing how (code steps need code blocks).
• References to types/functions/methods not defined in any task.

Self-review (yourself, not a subagent)

1. Spec coverage — every spec requirement maps to a task; list + fill gaps.
2. Placeholder scan — hunt the patterns above; fix inline.
3. Type consistency — names/signatures in later tasks match earlier definitions (clearLayers() in T3 vs clearFullLayers() in T7 is a bug).

For a fresh-eyes pass, dispatch plan-document-reviewer-prompt.md.

Execution handoff

Offer: (1) Subagent-driven (recommended) — superpowers:subagent-driven-development, fresh subagent per task + two-stage review; (2) Inline — superpowers:executing-plans, batch execution with checkpoints.

<!-- budget: ~74 -->