Now liveThe Skillselion MCP - thousands of ranked skills, loaded into your agent mid-task. No install.Get it →
pixel-process-ug avatar

Planning

  • 68 installs
  • 1 repo stars
  • Updated March 16, 2026
  • pixel-process-ug/superkit-agents

Helps with productivity & planning tasks.

About

planning is a Claude Code skill for productivity & planning. It helps solo builders move faster with AI-assisted development.

  • planning
  • Productivity & Planning
  • AI-coding skill

Planning by the numbers

  • 68 all-time installs (skills.sh)
  • +2 installs in the week ending Aug 4, 2026 (Skillselion tracking)
  • Ranked #1,510 of 3,282 Productivity & Planning skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
  • Data as of Aug 4, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
npx skills add https://github.com/pixel-process-ug/superkit-agents --skill planning

Add your badge

Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.

Listed on Skillselion
Installs68
repo stars1
Last updatedMarch 16, 2026
Repositorypixel-process-ug/superkit-agents

What it does

Helps with productivity & planning tasks.

Files

SKILL.mdMarkdownGitHub ↗

Structured Planning

Overview

Structured planning converts vague requirements into approved, documented implementation plans before any code is written. It forces clarifying questions, approach comparison with trade-offs, and explicit user approval — preventing the most common cause of wasted effort: building the wrong thing. Every task, regardless of perceived simplicity, goes through this process.

Announce at start: "I'm using the planning skill to create a structured implementation plan."

Trigger Conditions

  • User requests a new feature, enhancement, or change
  • A bug fix requires more than a one-line change
  • Refactoring work spanning multiple files
  • Any task where the approach is not already documented and approved
  • Transition from brainstorming skill with an approved design
  • /plan command invoked

---

Phase 1: Context Gathering

Goal: Understand the codebase and existing patterns before asking questions.

1. Read relevant files, docs, recent commits, and CLAUDE.md 2. Check memory files for known project context, stack, and conventions 3. Review existing plans in docs/plans/ for related work 4. Identify existing patterns the new work should follow 5. Note technical constraints discovered during exploration

STOP — Do NOT proceed to Phase 2 until:

  • [ ] You have explored the relevant parts of the codebase
  • [ ] You understand the existing architecture and patterns
  • [ ] You have checked memory files for prior decisions

---

Phase 2: Clarifying Questions

Goal: Eliminate ambiguity by asking targeted questions one at a time.

1. Ask ONE question per message — never overwhelm with multiple questions 2. Prefer multiple choice questions when possible 3. Study the codebase before asking — do not ask what you can discover 4. Convert vague requirements into specific, testable criteria

Question Category Priority

PriorityCategoryExample Question
1Purpose"What problem does this solve? Who is it for?"
2Success criteria"How will we know it works? What does 'done' look like?"
3Constraints"Are there performance, compatibility, or timeline constraints?"
4Non-goals"What should we explicitly NOT build?"
5Existing patterns"Should we follow the pattern used in X, or is a new approach needed?"
6Edge cases"What should happen when [boundary condition]?"

Question Rules

RuleRationale
One question per messagePrevents cognitive overload
Multiple choice preferredFaster to answer, reduces ambiguity
Research before askingRespect user's time — discover what you can
Testable criteriaVague answers lead to vague implementations

STOP — Do NOT proceed to Phase 3 until:

  • [ ] You understand the purpose and success criteria
  • [ ] You have identified constraints and non-goals
  • [ ] No critical ambiguities remain

---

Phase 3: Approach Design

Goal: Propose 2-3 concrete approaches with trade-offs and a clear recommendation.

For each approach, include:

SectionContent
Architecture summary2-3 sentences describing the approach
Key filesExact paths to create/modify
DependenciesExternal deps or breaking changes
Trade-offsExplicit pros and cons
Effort estimateNumber of tasks (not hours)
Risk levelLow / Medium / High with explanation

Approach Selection Decision Table

FactorWeightHow to Evaluate
Alignment with existing patternsHighDoes it match current codebase conventions?
SimplicityHighFewest moving parts that meet requirements
TestabilityMediumCan each component be independently tested?
Future extensibilityLowOnly consider if user mentioned future plans
PerformanceVariesOnly if user specified performance constraints

Lead with your recommended approach. Explain why it is the best choice given the constraints. Present alternatives to show you considered the trade-off space.

STOP — Do NOT proceed to Phase 4 until:

  • [ ] You have proposed at least 2 approaches
  • [ ] Each approach has trade-offs documented
  • [ ] You have made a clear recommendation with reasoning

---

Phase 4: Plan Documentation

Goal: Write a detailed, executable plan document and get explicit approval.

Plan Document Format

# [Feature Name] Implementation Plan

**Goal:** [One sentence]
**Architecture:** [2-3 sentences]
**Approach:** [Which approach was chosen and why]

---

### Task N: [Component Name]

**Files:**
- Create: `exact/path/to/file.ext`
- Modify: `exact/path/to/existing.ext`
- Test: `tests/exact/path/to/test.ext`

**Steps:**
1. Write the failing test
2. Run test to verify it fails
3. Write minimal implementation
4. Run test to verify it passes
5. Commit

**Verification:** [Exact command to verify this task]

Plan Quality Checklist

CriterionCheck
Every task has exact file pathsNo "somewhere in src/"
Every task has a verification commandNo "eyeball it"
Tasks are ordered by dependencyNo forward references
Tasks are 2-5 minutes eachNo "implement the whole module"
TDD steps are explicitRED-GREEN-REFACTOR per task

Save the plan to docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<feature>.md.

STOP — Do NOT proceed to Phase 5 until:

  • [ ] Plan document is written and saved
  • [ ] Every task has file paths, steps, and verification
  • [ ] User has explicitly approved the plan (said "yes", "approved", "go ahead", etc.)

---

Phase 5: Transition to Execution

Goal: Hand off the approved plan to the appropriate execution skill.

Transition Decision Table

SituationNext SkillRationale
Standard implementation (< 10 tasks)task-managementSequential tracked execution
Large implementation (10+ independent tasks)subagent-driven-developmentParallel execution with review gates
Autonomous development sessionautonomous-loopRalph-style iterative execution
Single focused taskexecuting-plansDirect plan execution

Invoke the chosen skill and pass the plan document path.

---

Anti-Patterns / Common Mistakes

Anti-PatternWhy It FailsCorrect Approach
"This is too simple to plan"Simple tasks have unexamined assumptionsPlan anyway — the plan can be short
"I already know the approach"Your approach may conflict with project patternsDocument it and get approval
"The user wants it fast"Bad code is slower than planned codePlanning prevents rework
"It's just a bug fix"Bug fixes need root cause analysisPlan the fix, not just the patch
"I'll plan as I go"That is improvising, not planningPlan first, execute second
Asking 5 questions at onceOverwhelms the user, gets vague answersOne question per message
Proposing only 1 approachNo trade-off analysis, may miss better optionsAlways propose 2-3 approaches
Vague file references"Update the tests" — which tests?Exact file paths always
Tasks that take 30+ minutesToo large to track and verifyBreak into 2-5 minute tasks
Starting code before approvalWastes effort if direction changesWait for explicit "yes"

---

Anti-Rationalization Guards

<HARD-GATE> Do NOT write any code, create any files, or take any implementation action until: 1. You have asked clarifying questions and understood the requirements 2. You have proposed approaches with trade-offs 3. The user has explicitly approved the plan

This applies to EVERY task regardless of perceived simplicity. </HARD-GATE>

Iron Law: NO CODE WITHOUT AN APPROVED PLAN. No exceptions. No "just this small thing." No "it's obvious."

If you catch yourself thinking any of the following, STOP immediately:

  • "Let me just quickly..." — No. Plan first.
  • "This doesn't need a full plan..." — Yes it does. The plan can be brief.
  • "I'll document it after..." — No. Document before.

---

Subagent Dispatch Opportunities

Task PatternDispatch ToWhen
Independent research tasks during planningAgent tool with subagent_type="Explore"When gathering context from multiple codebase areas
Plan validation across architecture layersAgent tool dispatching planner agentWhen plan covers multiple system boundaries
After plan approval, independent implementation tasksAgent tool (multiple parallel, per dispatching-parallel-agents skill)When plan steps have no dependencies between them

Follow the dispatching-parallel-agents skill protocol when dispatching.

---

Integration Points

SkillRelationshipWhen
brainstormingUpstream — provides design contextPlanning follows brainstorming
task-managementDownstream — receives approved planStandard execution path
executing-plansDownstream — executes plan directlySingle-task execution
subagent-driven-developmentDownstream — parallel executionLarge independent task sets
autonomous-loopDownstream — iterative executionRalph-style sessions
self-learningBidirectional — informs and learns from planningContext loading and pattern storage
verification-before-completionDownstream — verifies plan completenessBefore claiming plan is done
task-decompositionComplementary — provides WBS for complex plansWhen plan needs hierarchical breakdown

---

Concrete Examples

Example: Small Bug Fix Plan

# Fix: Login button disabled state not clearing

**Goal:** Fix login button remaining disabled after failed login attempt
**Architecture:** State management bug in LoginForm component
**Approach:** Reset `isSubmitting` state in the catch block of handleSubmit

### Task 1: Write failing test
**Files:** Test: `tests/components/LoginForm.test.tsx`
**Steps:** Write test that submits invalid credentials and verifies button re-enables
**Verification:** `npm test -- --grep "re-enables button after failed login"`

### Task 2: Fix the bug
**Files:** Modify: `src/components/LoginForm.tsx`
**Steps:** Add `setIsSubmitting(false)` to catch block in handleSubmit
**Verification:** `npm test -- --grep "LoginForm"` — all pass

Example: Transition Command

After plan approval:

Plan approved and saved to docs/plans/2026-03-15-login-fix.md.
Invoking task-management skill to begin tracked execution.

---

Verification Gate

Before claiming the plan is complete, verify: 1. IDENTIFY: Plan document exists at docs/plans/ 2. RUN: Review plan for completeness against quality checklist 3. READ: Verify all sections are filled with specific details 4. VERIFY: User has explicitly approved 5. CLAIM: Only then transition to implementation

---

Key Principles

  • DRY — Do not repeat yourself
  • YAGNI — Do not build what is not needed yet
  • TDD — Write tests first when applicable
  • Frequent commits — Small, atomic commits after each task
  • Exact paths — Always specify exact file paths in the plan

---

Skill Type

RIGID — Follow this process exactly for every implementation task. The phases are sequential and non-negotiable. No code without an approved plan.

Related skills

This week in AI coding

Five minutes, every Monday - the tools, releases and tactics for developers.

unsubscribe anytime.