Results for “implementation-plan”

Guides collaborative dialogue to turn ideas into fully formed designs and specs before any implementation begins.

Guides collaborative dialogue to turn ideas into designs and specs, exploring intent and requirements before any implementation.

Builds a strategic SEO plan for new or existing websites, covering competitive analysis, site architecture, content strategy, technical foundation, and a phased implementation roadmap with industry-specific templates.

Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable GitHub issues using tracer-bullet vertical slices. Use when user wants to convert a plan into issues, create implementation tickets, or break down work into issues.

Shape a rough product or project idea into a scoped brief before customer discovery, market research, specifications, UX, UI, or implementation planning

Guides collaborative dialogue to turn ideas into fully formed designs and specs, exploring intent, requirements, and design before implementation.

Plan-driven implementation in Sage/Acorn — reads docs/plans/ directory, implements components from approved sub-plans, runs scaffold generators (lando acorn acf:block), commits incrementally, auto-invokes block-scaffolding per ACF block, runs lando flush and lando theme-build after changes; full PR workflow with sage-reviewer gate. Invoke for: "/building", "implement from the plan", "implement from the plan", "build from the plan", "execute the plan", "start building", "code this feature". Skip when: there is no approved plan yet — run /architecture-discovery then /plan-generator first.

Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices. Use when user wants to convert a plan into issues, create implementation tickets, or break down work into issues.

Plan the UX and UI for a feature before writing code. Runs a structured discovery interview, then produces a design brief that guides implementation. Use during the planning phase to establish design direction, constraints, and strategy before any code is written.

Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices. Use when user wants to convert a plan into issues, create implementation tickets, or break down work into issues.

Generate comprehensive email marketing strategy with 90-day implementation roadmap. Analyzes business type (local-business, saas, ecommerce, creator, agency) to deliver industry-specific segmentation plans, automation sequences, content calendars, KPI targets, platform recommendations, and week-by-week rollout schedule. Use when building email program from scratch or restructuring existing strategy.

This skill should be used when the user asks to "plan a feature", "create PRD", "interview me about requirements", "define stories", "write a spec", "break down feature into tasks", "create implementation plan", "help me scope this feature", "what questions should I answer", or discusses feature planning. Covers the PRD interview process, spec structure, story atomization, and 4-phase workflow from idea to Dex tasks.

Agent profile for prioritize product scope, user outcomes, MVP slices, roadmap tradeoffs, and launch criteria. Use when Codex needs a specialist agent perspective for planning, implementation, review, debugging, validation, or handoff in this domain.

Translate a vague request or GitHub issue into a concrete, testable spec using five structured elements (problem, scope, acceptance criteria, edge cases, success criterion) before writing any code. Prevents scope creep, PR churn, and mid-implementation pivots.

Survey a codebase's animation and motion code as a senior motion advisor, then produce a prioritized audit and self-contained implementation plans for other agents (or cheaper models) to execute. Read-only on source code — it plans improvements, it does not apply them. Use when the user asks to "improve the animations", "audit the motion", "make this app feel better", or wants a roadmap of animation fixes rather than a review of a single diff. Source: github.com/emilkowalski/skills.

Reviews a product document (PRD, spec, design brief) BEFORE implementation to surface holes — undefined edge cases, missing states, policy gaps — by attacking what the document is SILENT about (things unwritten, and things written only for the happy path). Acts as a strict "sign-off manager," ruling Approve / Conditional / Reject and producing a polite, forwardable question list. Works for planners/PMs (self-review before sharing), engineers (blocking questions before coding), and designers (screen states with no mockup). Use whenever the user wants a spec/PRD/plan/brief checked for readiness or gaps, or says "review this spec", "find holes in this PRD", "poke holes in this", "is this plan good to build?", "can I start implementing this?", "what states/edge cases am I missing?", "what should I ask the PM before coding?", "run devil", or pastes/links a planning document and asks whether it's ready to act on. Do NOT use it to: write or draft a new spec, summarize or translate a document, estimate/break down tic

Use when asked to fix, build, refactor, review, verify, or release software and the work is non-trivial — including delivering a change request (issue, ticket, or request) from intake through planning, gates, implementation, review, verified PR, and authorized post-merge release. neckbeard routes the change through framing, discovery, design, implementation, review, verification, delivery, and learning — choosing the smallest *safe* intervention, proving it at the real delivery boundary, and leaving an inspectable evidence ledger. For change-request / issue-to-PR work, conditionally loads a 9-phase journey with gates, delivery packet, and lifecycle integration. Composes specialist catalog skills rather than replacing them. Not a persona, not a '10x developer' prompt, not a LOC-minimizer. The journey is not loaded for plain fixes, refactors, or reviews that lack an issue/ticket trajectory.

Designs the contract for an API change inside one codebase — a component's props, a function surface, URL or query parameters, an event payload, or a module boundary — through a discovery pass, an options document with one recommendation, a question round, and an adversarial validation round, with every element of the contract justified from one stated goal. Use when you want to design, shape, decide, or nail down an interface, contract, signature, or API change for a capability you can already describe, sized for roughly one pull request. Produces a design document and changes no code. Does not specify what a feature should do — use plan-a-feature. Does not plan delivery or sequencing — use plan-implementation. Does not assess the architecture of existing code — use architectural-analysis. Does not write the code — use tdd. Does not restructure existing code — use refactor. Runs its rounds without pausing for review; to review each round as it lands, use pairing.

When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment, or build a growth experimentation program. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "should I test this," "which version is better," "test two versions," "statistical significance," "how long should I run this test," "growth experiments," "experiment velocity," "experiment backlog," "ICE score," "experimentation program," or "experiment playbook." Use this whenever someone is comparing two approaches and wants to measure which performs better, or when they want to build a systematic experimentation practice. For tracking implementation, see analytics. For page-level conversion optimization, see cro.

Build MATLAB apps from requirements to working code. Asks discovery questions (or skips them when the path is known), recommends UIFigure or UIHTML architecture, identifies layout archetype (Dashboard, Explorer, Tabbed, Wizard, Canvas), produces an implementation plan, and executes the build. For UIFigure apps, optionally serializes as App Designer (.mlapp or plain-text .m + .xml). Use when a user wants to build a MATLAB app, create a GUI, make an interactive tool, build a uifigure app, build a uihtml app, build an App Designer app, build a .mlapp app, build a plain-text App Designer app, or asks which approach to use. Also use when user describes spatial layout needs: dashboard, control panel, sidebar, tabs, wizard, stepper, canvas, workspace.

Expert Socratic discovery skill for exploring ideas, architecture decisions, and technical design before writing any code. Use this skill — proactively and always first — when requirements are vague, when the user is debating between technical approaches, when the problem is unclear, or when a design decision could have significant architectural consequences. Triggers on: "should we use X or Y", "help me think through", "I'm not sure how to approach this", "what's the best architecture for", "trade-offs between", "design before I code", "let's think through this", "I have an idea", "how should I structure", "help me design", "I want to build X but not sure how", "what approach would you recommend", "is this the right way to". Produces a validated design doc with 2-3 implementation options, trade-offs, and a recommendation. Always use before planning when the approach is not yet locked.