# Plan Website > Creates a Work Breakdown Structure for planning and executing a website build from scratch or as a migration/overhaul. Organizes platform and stack requirements, repository setup, planning artifacts, implementation slices, QA gates, and launch work into deliverables, work packages, and tasks, with phase checklists as supporting artifacts. Use when the user mentions building, launching, or overhauling a website: redesigns, CMS migrations, new site builds, or multi-team web projects. Triggers on phrases like "website build", "site launch", "web project checklist", "website redesign", "launching a site", "new website", or "website planning". Also use when the user wants to know what documents or deliverables a web project needs, or is coordinating design, dev, content, and SEO teams on a site. - Skill: `datashaman/plan-website` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add datashaman/plan-website` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/datashaman/plan-website/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Marketing & Growth - Author: datashaman (https://skillmd.com/u/datashaman) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/datashaman/plan-website --- # Plan Website - WBS-led website delivery planning A website build (not just a redesign — if structure, content types, or CMS change, it's a build) is a multi-month, cross-team project. This skill creates a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) that carries the project from platform and stack requirements through repository foundation, planning artifacts, implementation slices, verification, and launch. **Important distinction:** A *redesign* only re-skins an existing site. If content types, URL structure, database, or CMS change at all, it's a **build** — treat it accordingly. ## Phase order Always walk through phases in this order. Each phase is a dependency for the next. 0. Discovery 1. Sitemap 2. Content Strategy 3. Wireframes 4. Designs 5. Analytics Implementation Plan 6. SEO Implementation Plan 7. Development 8. QA & Launch ## How to use this skill When a user comes with a website build question: 1. **Identify the project type and current phase** in the dependency sequence. 2. **Create or preserve the WBS** as the source of truth for build plans, delivery plans, roadmaps, Growth projects, Jira epic lists, or implementation checklists. 3. **Surface the right questions** for the current phase (see per-phase sections below). 4. **Flag missing dependencies** — if they're in Phase 4 but have no signed-off wireframes, flag it. 5. **Attach supporting artifacts** to WBS items — checklists, template lists, brief outlines, review criteria, entry criteria, exit criteria, and sign-off gates. 6. **Don't let teams skip delivery work** — gently push back if the plan can reach QA or launch without a repository, implementation tasks, checks, deployments, and runnable behavior. When the user explicitly asks what documents are needed before development, a document-only planning answer is allowed. When the user asks for a build plan, delivery plan, roadmap, Growth project, Jira epic list, WBS, or implementation checklist, create a WBS first and attach checklists to the relevant WBS items. ## Primary Output The primary output is a Work Breakdown Structure. Use checklists as supporting artifacts for specific phases, entry criteria, exit criteria, reviews, QA, and launch. Do not let checklists become the plan. When the user asks for a website build plan, create a WBS first. Then attach phase checklists, review criteria, and sign-off gates to the relevant WBS items. ## Repository requirement Run this skill from inside a local git repository. The repository is the natural home for planning artifacts, ADRs, wireframes, implementation work, CI history, QA evidence, and launch records. If the user is not in a git repository, stop and say so plainly. Do not produce a substantial build plan as chat-only output when there is no project home to store the resulting artifacts. Treat repository selection or creation as the first task in the WBS. ## Artifact persistence The plan and its supporting artifacts must be stored as files in the repository. Do not let the WBS, phase checklists, review gates, or planning decisions live only in chat. Chat is for: - summarizing what changed - explaining blockers or assumptions - linking to the files that now hold the plan Chat is not the source of truth. ## Delivery Invariant The primary output of this skill is a WBS, not a checklist. If the user asks for a project plan, roadmap, Growth project, Jira epic list, delivery plan, or implementation checklist, produce or preserve a WBS as the source of truth. Never produce a WBS where discovery, sitemap, content, wireframes, designs, analytics plans, SEO plans, QA, and launch are the only work items. Those are supporting artifacts. They are not the whole build. A valid WBS must include: - an upfront repository creation/foundation task before substantial planning artifacts are generated - platform and stack requirements covering language, framework, CMS, hosting, runtime, data stores, integrations, and operational constraints - CI workflow, local verification commands, and a test strategy before other testable implementation work starts - wireframe dependencies and browser acceptance tests for every UI-bearing implementation work item - deliverables, work packages, and tasks - implementation work packages for each major user-facing capability - tasks that produce code, configuration, migrations, tests, integrations, deployed environments, or runnable behavior - QA/launch gates that depend on completed implementation work - explicit rejection of launch readiness if no runnable site/app exists ## Work Breakdown Structure For delivery planning, always create a WBS. A phase checklist is not enough and must not be presented as the plan. The WBS must include: - root deliverables tied to working increments or launch gates - work packages under each deliverable - implementation tasks under build work packages - repository/artifact setup as the first foundation work package - technical requirements and platform decision work before framework-specific implementation tasks - CI/test foundation work before feature, template, integration, migration, or CMS implementation slices - UI-bearing work items tied to approved wireframes and browser acceptance tests - QA/launch tasks that depend on implemented software The WBS must make it impossible to complete the project by finishing documents alone. If most WBS leaves are documents, specs, reviews, or checklists, revise it before presenting it. ## Technical Requirements And Platform Fit Every build WBS must make language, framework, platform, and hosting requirements explicit before implementation slices are estimated or assigned. Capture known constraints and open decisions for: - language/runtime requirements, such as Node.js, PHP, Ruby, Python, .NET, Java, or static HTML - frontend framework requirements, such as React, Next.js, Astro, Vue, SvelteKit, Laravel Blade, WordPress themes, or platform-native templates - CMS/platform requirements, such as WordPress, Drupal, Webflow, Shopify, Contentful, Sanity, Strapi, HubSpot CMS, or a custom admin - hosting/deployment target, such as Vercel, Netlify, AWS, Azure, GCP, Cloudflare, managed WordPress, Shopify, or existing client infrastructure - database/search/cache/queue requirements where applicable - authentication, forms, payments, CRM, marketing automation, analytics, consent, localization, and other integration requirements - browser/device support, accessibility target, performance budget, security/compliance constraints, and content editor workflow needs - team constraints, including existing skills, preferred tools, maintainability expectations, licensing, budget, and handover requirements If the stack is undecided, add a WBS work package for platform evaluation and decision records. Do not generate framework-specific implementation tasks until the assumptions are named. If the user only needs early planning, capture the open decisions and mark downstream implementation estimates as provisional. ## CI And Test Foundation For any build with code, templates, configuration, migrations, or integrations, the WBS must establish a CI/test foundation before feature implementation slices begin. The CI/test foundation work item should cover: - define local verification commands for linting, type checks, unit tests, integration tests, build checks, and content/schema validation where relevant - add the CI workflow before other testable work items start - make CI run the same core checks developers run locally - include at least one initial runnable check, even if deeper coverage is added by later slices - define test ownership for templates, CMS schema/content model, forms, redirects, analytics events, integrations, accessibility, performance, and deployment smoke tests - require each later implementation slice to add or update relevant tests/checks as part of its acceptance criteria If the platform cannot support automated checks for a specific area, name the limitation and add a manual verification task with an owner. Do not let "QA later" replace the CI/test foundation. ## UI Work Acceptance Every UI-bearing work item must have corresponding wireframes before implementation starts and browser acceptance testing before it is considered complete. This applies to: - page templates - layouts and responsive breakpoints - navigation and menus - search interfaces - forms and validation states - CMS editing previews or authoring UI where in scope - interactive components, filters, calculators, maps, account areas, checkout flows, or other user-facing behavior - error states, empty states, loading states, success states, and 404/redirect handling where visible to users For each UI-bearing WBS item, require: - linked wireframe or explicit wireframe gap/blocker - responsive states for mobile, tablet, and desktop where relevant - browser acceptance criteria based on user-observable behavior - automated browser checks where practical, such as Playwright, Cypress, WebdriverIO, or platform-native browser testing - manual cross-browser/device verification where automation is not practical - accessibility checks for keyboard operation, focus order, semantic structure, labels, alt text, and contrast - visual/layout verification that text, controls, and media do not overlap or break at supported viewport sizes Do not allow UI implementation tasks to be marked ready if the wireframe dependency is missing. Do not allow UI work to be marked done with only unit tests or code review; browser acceptance evidence is required. ## Repository Foundation For any build, migration, CMS implementation, or redesign that changes code, templates, infrastructure, integrations, or deployment behavior, the plan must create or select the repository upfront, before generating substantial project artifacts. Do not wait until a late "Development" phase to create the repo. The repository is the project memory from day one: discovery notes, sitemaps, content models, wireframes, design specs, analytics plans, SEO plans, ADRs, implementation plans, and QA runbooks should live there as versioned artifacts. Later, the same repository becomes the source of implementation evidence through commits, PRs, checks, deployments, and review history. The repository foundation work item should cover: - create or select the source repository - establish the documentation/artifact folder structure - commit initial project README and planning artifact index - document technical requirements and choose the initial language/framework/CMS/platform structure - add local development commands - add baseline CI workflow and test strategy before feature implementation starts - add environment/configuration strategy - add first deployable/staging path where applicable The repository foundation work item should also define where the WBS, phase artifacts, wireframes, ADRs, and QA evidence will be stored so later work does not drift back into chat. ## Anti-Patterns To Prevent Reject or revise any plan with these smells: - There is no WBS. - The WBS is only a flat phase checklist. - The WBS leaf tasks are mostly documents, specs, reviews, or sign-offs. - There is no upfront "create/select repository" task before docs/specs are produced. - Planning artifacts are assumed to live only in chat, shared drives, or external docs with no versioned project home. - Language, framework, CMS, hosting, runtime, or integration requirements are missing or buried as assumptions. - The plan assigns implementation tasks before the stack/platform decision is explicit. - CI/test setup is postponed until after feature work starts. - Feature, template, migration, CMS, or integration tasks have acceptance criteria but no corresponding test/check strategy. - UI-bearing work items have no corresponding wireframes. - UI-bearing work items are considered complete without browser acceptance testing. - Phase 7 is a single "Development" placeholder. - QA/Launch has detailed checklists but development has no child work. - Most tasks are named "define," "document," "plan," "specify," or "review." - The plan can reach launch readiness without commits, PRs, checks, deployments, or runnable staging behavior. - Evidence is treated as manually attaching links rather than producing real implementation artifacts. ## Phase 0: Discovery **What it is:** The alignment phase before any artifact is produced — defining why the site exists, who it serves, and how success is measured. **Why it matters:** Decisions made here cascade through every later phase. KPIs defined now drive the analytics plan (Phase 5); personas and journeys shape the sitemap (Phase 1) and content strategy (Phase 2). Skipping discovery is how a build ends up beautifully executed but aimed at the wrong target. **Common deliverables:** - Project brief / scope document / SOW - Stakeholder map and RACI - Competitor / market audit - Personas and user journeys - Brand guidelines / brand book - Success metrics and KPIs - Technical requirements and platform constraints brief **Questions to ask:** - What is the primary goal of this site, and how will you know it worked? - Who are the main audiences, and what do they come to do? - Who are the decision-makers and sign-off owners? - Do brand guidelines already exist, or are they part of this project? - Is there an existing language, framework, CMS, hosting platform, or infrastructure constraint? - Who will maintain the site after launch, and what stack can that team operate safely? - What integrations are required, such as CRM, analytics, forms, payments, search, auth, consent, or marketing automation? - Are there browser support, accessibility, performance, security, compliance, localization, or data residency requirements? ## Phase 1: Sitemap **What it is:** A document listing every URL — existing and new — involved in the project. **Why it matters:** Gives the dev team early visibility into content types, the scale of restructuring, and potential refactoring work — especially critical for migrations. **Must include:** - All existing URLs in scope - All new URLs - New URL structure if it's changing - Clear indication of what's being kept, redirected, or removed **Questions to ask:** - Is this a new site or a migration from an existing one? - Do you have an existing sitemap or URL inventory? - Is the URL structure changing? ## Phase 2: Content Strategy **What it is:** A plan that defines what content exists, what changes, and how content and site structure work together. **Non-negotiable:** This phase is not only about hierarchy or page inventory. It should consider content types, how they are presented, what inputs need to be captured, and any editorial constraints before wireframes and designs are treated as ready. **Why it matters:** Content teams and UX/design must work in parallel — content shapes the most prominent components on the site. Starting dev without a content plan leads to placeholder hell and late-stage rework. **Common deliverables:** - Content audit (what to rewrite, redirect, or retire) - New hub page outlines and copy - Service/product page rewrites - Content models or CMS field definitions - Page-level content input requirements - Character limits on hero and CTA copy - CTA button copy guidelines **Questions to ask:** - Is there existing content to audit, or is this greenfield? - Are there keyword or SEO targets driving the content structure? - What content types appear on the important pages and templates? - Are any of them reusable across multiple pages? - Are there forms, filters, uploads, or other inputs whose capture requirements affect the page structure? - What editorial, legal, brand, SEO, or governance constraints shape that content? - Who owns content creation — internal team or agency? ## Phase 3: Wireframes **What it is:** The blueprints of the website. The single most important document type in a website build. **Why it matters:** Wireframes are the contract between design, dev, and stakeholders. Incomplete or vague wireframes are the leading cause of feature creep, missed deadlines, and developer pain. ### Universal requirements (every wireframe) - Define header level for every heading (H1, H2, H3, etc.) - Define image aspect ratios for every image placeholder - No color — white, black, and grays only - Consider the critical path for every template - Use representative content shapes and lengths rather than polished final copy - Create mobile, tablet, and desktop versions for every template ### Required templates A separate wireframe is needed for each unique template: - Homepage - Service/product hub page - Individual service/product page - General/default page (About, Careers, Privacy, etc.) - Blog hub - Blog post/single - Blog category (if visually distinct from hub) - 404 page ### Navigation wireframes Navigation is its own mini-application. Cover all states: - Default (top of page) - Sticky (scrolled below fold) - Mobile/tablet menu open - Second/third level menu open (if applicable) - Scroll-up sticky behavior (if applicable) - Search form open/closed ### Form wireframes For every custom form (skip if using embedded CRO tools like HubSpot/Pardot): - Default/empty state - Validation errors - Successful submission - Pagination (if multi-step) ### Component briefs Each component and functional element should have a short written brief covering: - Purpose and best use - Rules and constraints - Any flexible sizing behavior (e.g., "logo drops 10% into the hero") ### Best practices - **Build mobile wireframes first** — mobile is the hardest and most constrained; work outward. - **Use aspect ratios for images** — allows consistent sizing across devices (common: 1:1, 3:2, 4:3, 16:9). - **All teams must review and sign off** — dev especially must flag issues before designs begin. - **Link UI work to wireframes** — every UI-bearing WBS item needs a corresponding approved wireframe or an explicit blocker. - Nothing proceeds to design until wireframes are finalized and approved. ## Phase 4: Designs **What it is:** The visual layer applied to the wireframe scaffolding. **Why it matters:** Designs should introduce zero new structure or functionality — only visual treatment. Surprises at the design stage mean the wireframes were incomplete. **Preferred approach:** Component-based design system (see Brad Frost's Atomic Design). Avoid one-off page comps, which increase inconsistency and confusion. **Design must define:** - Design system: fonts, brand colors, header styles, button styles - Zero edge cases — all colors, typefaces, and weights follow consistent rules - Baseline HTML element styles: - H1–H6, Strong, Em, Blockquote, Quote - Links (default, hover, focus, active, visited) - Buttons (form submission, app actions) - Form fields (select, radio, checkbox) - Captions, paragraphs - Every component in three states: ideal content, too little content, too much content - Real approved copy examples in components **Sign-off requirement:** All internal and external teams must review before development begins. ## Phase 5: Analytics Implementation Plan **What it is:** A plan formalizing all analytics and tracking requirements — delivered to dev *before* development starts. **Why it matters:** Some tracking requires dev work (custom events, data layer pushes). Springing these on devs mid-build causes delays. **Common requirements:** - Google Tag Manager installation - Third-party analytics platforms - CRO tool integration (Hotjar, Optimizely, etc.) - Closed-loop / CRM integration - Custom form tracking events - Marketing funnel / conversion event tracking ## Phase 6: SEO Implementation Plan **What it is:** A plan from the SEO team covering all technical SEO requirements — also delivered to dev before development starts. **Common requirements:** - 301 redirect map (critical for migrations) - Schema markup requirements - URL structure requirements - robots.txt definitions - Canonical tag strategy - XML sitemap requirements ## Phase 7: Development **What it is:** The build workstream where plans become runnable software, configuration, migrations, integrations, tests, and deployable environments. **Why it matters:** Development is not one checkbox and not "assemble prior plans." For a build project, implementation work must be decomposed into vertical slices that produce working increments. QA and launch cannot verify documents in place of runnable behavior. When generating a project plan, break development into vertical implementation slices such as: - project foundation: repository, framework, runtime, environments, CI, deployment - platform and stack implementation: CMS/platform setup, hosting target, runtime configuration, data stores, secrets, and infrastructure - CI/test foundation: local verification commands, CI workflow, initial checks, and slice-level testing expectations - content model/CMS schema implementation - template/page implementation - navigation/search/forms implementation - migration/import scripts - analytics and SEO technical implementation - integrations - accessibility/performance hardening - content publishing workflow - production deployment Each slice must have acceptance criteria based on runnable behavior: - code exists - tests/checks run where practical and are included in CI or an explicit manual verification path - staging or local demo can exercise the feature - UI-bearing work has linked wireframes and browser acceptance evidence - QA can verify it against the relevant plan **Development entry checklist:** - [ ] Repository exists and contains the project README, artifact index, and planning history - [ ] Language, framework, CMS/platform, hosting, runtime, and integration requirements are documented or explicitly marked as open blockers - [ ] Stack/platform decision records exist for non-obvious choices - [ ] Local verification commands and baseline CI workflow exist before feature implementation starts - [ ] Test/check expectations are defined for each implementation slice - [ ] Sitemap finalized and signed off - [ ] Content strategy complete; content either ready or on a firm schedule - [ ] Wireframes complete for all templates, all breakpoints, signed off by all teams - [ ] Every UI-bearing implementation slice links to an approved wireframe or is blocked - [ ] Browser acceptance test approach is defined for templates, navigation, forms, and interactive UI - [ ] Designs complete, component-based, signed off by all teams - [ ] Analytics plan delivered to dev - [ ] SEO plan delivered to dev (including redirect map) - [ ] All implementation slices are represented in the WBS with acceptance criteria - [ ] All open questions resolved or explicitly tracked as blockers ## Phase 8: QA & Launch **What it is:** The phase that takes a built site from "done on staging" to "live and verified in production." **Why it matters:** Launch day is where the cost of every earlier shortcut comes due. A missing redirect tanks SEO rankings; an untested form silently drops leads; no rollback plan turns a small bug into an outage. Treat go-live as a deliberate, checklisted event — not the moment dev happens to finish. Phase 8 cannot start unless: - a repository exists and contains both the planning artifact history and implementation history - the chosen language, framework, CMS/platform, hosting target, runtime configuration, and required integrations are implemented or explicitly out of scope - CI has run against the production-candidate branch or release candidate, or every unsupported check has an explicit manual verification record - the WBS includes completed implementation work packages for in-scope features - a runnable staging or production-candidate environment exists - all in-scope templates/features have implementation work items - all UI-bearing implementation work has corresponding wireframes and browser acceptance evidence - forms, redirects, analytics, CMS editing, and public pages are implemented - QA is testing software behavior, not documents Explicitly reject launch readiness if no runnable site/app exists. **Common deliverables:** - QA / test plan and cross-browser + device matrix - Redirect testing (verifies the Phase 6 301 map against the Phase 1 sitemap) - Analytics verification (events fire, goals record) against the Phase 5 plan - Go-live runbook and rollback plan - Post-launch monitoring plan (uptime, errors, Core Web Vitals) - CMS training docs / client handover **Launch checklist:** - [ ] All templates QA'd across the supported browser/device matrix - [ ] Browser acceptance tests or manual browser verification completed for all UI-bearing work - [ ] 301 redirects tested — every retired URL resolves to its replacement - [ ] Analytics and conversion tracking verified firing in production - [ ] XML sitemap submitted; robots.txt and canonicals confirmed - [ ] Forms tested end-to-end (submission, validation, notifications) - [ ] Rollback plan documented and the team knows who triggers it - [ ] Post-launch monitoring live; owner assigned for the first 48 hours - [ ] Stakeholders trained on the CMS and handover docs delivered **Questions to ask:** - What browsers and devices must be supported? - Who owns the go/no-go decision on launch day? - Is there a maintenance window, or is this a zero-downtime cutover? - Who monitors the site immediately after launch, and for how long?