diegosouzapw Plan Writing
Overview
This public intake copy packages plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills/skills/plan-writing from https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills into the native Omni Skills editorial shape without hiding its origin.
Use it when the operator needs the upstream workflow, support files, and repository context to stay intact while the public validator and private enhancer continue their normal downstream flow.
This intake keeps the copied upstream files intact and uses the external_source block in metadata.json plus ORIGIN.md as the provenance anchor for review.
Plan Writing > Source: obra/superpowers
Imported source sections that did not map cleanly to the public headings are still preserved below or in the support files. Notable imported sections: Plan Structure (Flexible, Not Fixed!), Goal, Tasks, Notes, Limitations.
When to Use This Skill
Use this section as the trigger filter. It should make the activation boundary explicit before the operator loads files, runs commands, or opens a pull request.
- [Main success criteria]
- New project from scratch
- Adding a feature
- Fixing a bug (if complex)
- Refactoring multiple files
- Use when the request clearly matches the imported source intent: Structured task planning with clear breakdowns, dependencies, and verification criteria. Use when implementing features, refactoring, or any multi-step work.
Operating Table
| Situation | Start here | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| First-time use | metadata.json |
Confirms repository, branch, commit, and imported path through the external_source block before touching the copied workflow |
| Provenance review | ORIGIN.md |
Gives reviewers a plain-language audit trail for the imported source |
| Workflow execution | SKILL.md |
Starts with the smallest copied file that materially changes execution |
| Supporting context | SKILL.md |
Adds the next most relevant copied source file without loading the entire package |
| Handoff decision | ## Related Skills |
Helps the operator switch to a stronger native skill when the task drifts |
Workflow
This workflow is intentionally editorial and operational at the same time. It keeps the imported source useful to the operator while still satisfying the public intake standards that feed the downstream enhancer flow.
- Confirm the user goal, the scope of the imported workflow, and whether this skill is still the right router for the task.
- Read the overview and provenance files before loading any copied upstream support files.
- Load only the references, examples, prompts, or scripts that materially change the outcome for the current request.
- Execute the upstream workflow while keeping provenance and source boundaries explicit in the working notes.
- Validate the result against the upstream expectations and the evidence you can point to in the copied files.
- Escalate or hand off to a related skill when the work moves out of this imported workflow's center of gravity.
- Before merge or closure, record what was used, what changed, and what the reviewer still needs to verify.
Imported Workflow Notes
Imported: Overview
This skill provides a framework for breaking down work into clear, actionable tasks with verification criteria.
Imported: Plan Structure (Flexible, Not Fixed!)
# [Task Name]
## Examples
### Example 1: Ask for the upstream workflow directly
```text
Use @plan-writing-v2 to handle <task>. Start from the copied upstream workflow, load only the files that change the outcome, and keep provenance visible in the answer.
Explanation: This is the safest starting point when the operator needs the imported workflow, but not the entire repository.
Example 2: Ask for a provenance-grounded review
Review @plan-writing-v2 against metadata.json and ORIGIN.md, then explain which copied upstream files you would load first and why.
Explanation: Use this before review or troubleshooting when you need a precise, auditable explanation of origin and file selection.
Example 3: Narrow the copied support files before execution
Use @plan-writing-v2 for <task>. Load only the copied references, examples, or scripts that change the outcome, and name the files explicitly before proceeding.
Explanation: This keeps the skill aligned with progressive disclosure instead of loading the whole copied package by default.
Example 4: Build a reviewer packet
Review @plan-writing-v2 using the copied upstream files plus provenance, then summarize any gaps before merge.
Explanation: This is useful when the PR is waiting for human review and you want a repeatable audit packet.
Best Practices
Treat the generated public skill as a reviewable packaging layer around the upstream repository. The goal is to keep provenance explicit and load only the copied source material that materially improves execution.
- Each task should take 2-5 minutes
- One clear outcome per task
- Independently verifiable
- How do you know it's done?
- What can you check/test?
- What's the expected output?
- Dependencies identified
Imported Operating Notes
Imported: Task Breakdown Principles
1. Small, Focused Tasks
- Each task should take 2-5 minutes
- One clear outcome per task
- Independently verifiable
2. Clear Verification
- How do you know it's done?
- What can you check/test?
- What's the expected output?
3. Logical Ordering
- Dependencies identified
- Parallel work where possible
- Critical path highlighted
- Phase X: Verification is always LAST
4. Dynamic Naming in Project Root
- Plan files are saved as
{task-slug}.mdin the PROJECT ROOT - Name derived from task (e.g., "add auth" →
auth-feature.md) - NEVER inside
.claude/,docs/, or temp folders
Imported: Planning Principles (NOT Templates!)
🔴 NO fixed templates. Each plan is UNIQUE to the task.
Principle 1: Keep It SHORT
| ❌ Wrong | ✅ Right |
|---|---|
| 50 tasks with sub-sub-tasks | 5-10 clear tasks max |
| Every micro-step listed | Only actionable items |
| Verbose descriptions | One-line per task |
Rule: If plan is longer than 1 page, it's too long. Simplify.
Principle 2: Be SPECIFIC, Not Generic
| ❌ Wrong | ✅ Right |
|---|---|
| "Set up project" | "Run npx create-next-app" |
| "Add authentication" | "Install next-auth, create /api/auth/[...nextauth].ts" |
| "Style the UI" | "Add Tailwind classes to Header.tsx" |
Rule: Each task should have a clear, verifiable outcome.
Principle 3: Dynamic Content Based on Project Type
For NEW PROJECT:
- What tech stack? (decide first)
- What's the MVP? (minimal features)
- What's the file structure?
For FEATURE ADDITION:
- Which files are affected?
- What dependencies needed?
- How to verify it works?
For BUG FIX:
- What's the root cause?
- What file/line to change?
- How to test the fix?
Principle 4: Scripts Are Project-Specific
🔴 DO NOT copy-paste script commands. Choose based on project type.
| Project Type | Relevant Scripts |
|---|---|
| Frontend/React | ux_audit.py, accessibility_checker.py |
| Backend/API | api_validator.py, security_scan.py |
| Mobile | mobile_audit.py |
| Database | schema_validator.py |
| Full-stack | Mix of above based on what you touched |
Wrong: Adding all scripts to every plan Right: Only scripts relevant to THIS task
Principle 5: Verification is Simple
| ❌ Wrong | ✅ Right |
|---|---|
| "Verify the component works correctly" | "Run npm run dev, click button, see toast" |
| "Test the API" | "curl localhost:3000/api/users returns 200" |
| "Check styles" | "Open browser, verify dark mode toggle works" |
Troubleshooting
Problem: The operator skipped the imported context and answered too generically
Symptoms: The result ignores the upstream workflow in plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills/skills/plan-writing, fails to mention provenance, or does not use any copied source files at all.
Solution: Re-open metadata.json, ORIGIN.md, and the most relevant copied upstream files. Check the external_source block first, then restate the provenance before continuing.
Problem: The imported workflow feels incomplete during review
Symptoms: Reviewers can see the generated SKILL.md, but they cannot quickly tell which references, examples, or scripts matter for the current task.
Solution: Point at the exact copied references, examples, scripts, or assets that justify the path you took. If the gap is still real, record it in the PR instead of hiding it.
Problem: The task drifted into a different specialization
Symptoms: The imported skill starts in the right place, but the work turns into debugging, architecture, design, security, or release orchestration that a native skill handles better. Solution: Use the related skills section to hand off deliberately. Keep the imported provenance visible so the next skill inherits the right context instead of starting blind.
Related Skills
@00-andruia-consultant- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@00-andruia-consultant-v2- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@10-andruia-skill-smith- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@10-andruia-skill-smith-v2- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
Additional Resources
Use this support matrix and the linked files below as the operator packet for this imported skill. They should reflect real copied source material, not generic scaffolding.
| Resource family | What it gives the reviewer | Example path |
|---|---|---|
references |
copied reference notes, guides, or background material from upstream | references/n/a |
examples |
worked examples or reusable prompts copied from upstream | examples/n/a |
scripts |
upstream helper scripts that change execution or validation | scripts/n/a |
agents |
routing or delegation notes that are genuinely part of the imported package | agents/n/a |
assets |
supporting assets or schemas copied from the source package | assets/n/a |
Imported Reference Notes
Imported: Best Practices (Quick Reference)
- Start with goal - What are we building/fixing?
- Max 10 tasks - If more, break into multiple plans
- Each task verifiable - Clear "done" criteria
- Project-specific - No copy-paste templates
- Update as you go - Mark
[x]when complete
Imported: Goal
One sentence: What are we building/fixing?
Imported: Tasks
- Task 1: [Specific action] → Verify: [How to check]
- Task 2: [Specific action] → Verify: [How to check]
- Task 3: [Specific action] → Verify: [How to check]
Imported: Notes
[Any important considerations]
---
#### Imported: Limitations
- Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.
- Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review.
- Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing.