evo-writing-plans

Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for our codebase and questionable taste. Document everything they need to know: which files to touch for each task, code, testing, docs they might need to check, how to test it. Give them the whole plan as bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.

Safety Notice

This listing is imported from skills.sh public index metadata. Review upstream SKILL.md and repository scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "evo-writing-plans" with this command: npx skills add rockcookies/skills/rockcookies-skills-evo-writing-plans

Writing Plans

Overview

Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for our codebase and questionable taste. Document everything they need to know: which files to touch for each task, code, testing, docs they might need to check, how to test it. Give them the whole plan as bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.

Assume they are a skilled developer, but know almost nothing about our toolset or problem domain. Assume they don't know good test design very well.

Announce at start: "I'm using the evo-writing-plans skill to create the implementation plan."

Context: This should be run in a dedicated worktree (created by evo-brainstorming skill).

Save plans to: docs/evo/YYYY-MM-DD-<feature-name>.md

Bite-Sized Task Granularity

Each step is one action (2-5 minutes):

  • "Write the failing test" - step

  • "Run it to make sure it fails" - step

  • "Implement the minimal code to make the test pass" - step

  • "Run the tests and make sure they pass" - step

Plan Document Header

Every plan MUST start with this header:

[Feature Name] Implementation Plan

For Claude: REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: Use evo-executing-plans to implement this plan task-by-task.

Goal: [One sentence describing what this builds]

Architecture: [2-3 sentences about approach]

Tech Stack: [Key technologies/libraries]


Task Structure

Task N: [Component Name]

Files:

  • Create: exact/path/to/file.py
  • Modify: exact/path/to/existing.py:123-145
  • Test: tests/exact/path/to/test.py

Step 1: Write the failing test

def test_specific_behavior():
    result = function(input)
    assert result == expected

Step 2: Run test to verify it fails

Run: pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v Expected: FAIL with "function not defined"

Step 3: Write minimal implementation

def function(input):
    return expected

Step 4: Run test to verify it passes

Run: pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v Expected: PASS

Step 5: Commit

git add tests/path/test.py src/path/file.py
git commit -m "feat: add specific feature"

Remember

  • Exact file paths always

  • Complete code in plan (not "add validation")

  • Exact commands with expected output

  • Reference relevant skills with @ syntax

  • DRY, YAGNI, TDD, frequent commits

Execution Handoff

After saving the plan, offer execution choice:

"Plan complete and saved to docs/evo/<filename>.md . Two execution options:

  1. This Session - I execute using evo-executing-plans here, batch execution with checkpoints

  2. New Session (recommended) - Open new session with evo-executing-plans, batch execution with checkpoints

Which approach?"

If This Session chosen:

  • Stay in this session

  • Fresh subagent per task + code review

If New Session chosen:

  • Guide them to open new session in worktree

  • REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: New session uses evo-executing-plans

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

Coding

node-dev

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

tsdown

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

web-design-guidelines

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

turborepo

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review