majiayu000 Workflow Planning Skill - Quick Reference
This skill enables structured, systematic development workflows. The assistant should apply these patterns when users need to break down complex projects, create implementation plans, or execute multi-step development tasks with clear checkpoints.
Inspired by: Obra Superpowers patterns for structured agent workflows.
Quick Reference
| Command | Purpose | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
/brainstorm |
Generate ideas and approaches | Starting new features, exploring solutions |
/write-plan |
Create detailed implementation plan | Before coding, after requirements clarification |
/execute-plan |
Implement plan step-by-step | When plan is approved, ready to code |
/checkpoint |
Review progress, adjust plan | Mid-implementation, after major milestones |
/summarize |
Capture learnings, document decisions | End of session, before context reset |
When to Use This Skill
The assistant should invoke this skill when a user requests:
- Break down a complex feature into steps
- Create an implementation plan
- Brainstorm approaches to a problem
- Execute a multi-step development task
- Track progress on a project
- Review and adjust mid-implementation
The Three-Phase Workflow
Phase 1: Brainstorm
Purpose: Explore the problem space and generate potential solutions.
/brainstorm [topic or problem]
OUTPUT:
1. Problem Understanding
- What are we solving?
- Who is affected?
- What are the constraints?
2. Potential Approaches (3-5)
- Approach A: [description, pros, cons]
- Approach B: [description, pros, cons]
- Approach C: [description, pros, cons]
3. Questions to Resolve
- [List of unknowns needing clarification]
4. Recommended Approach
- [Selected approach with justification]
Phase 2: Write Plan
Purpose: Create a detailed, actionable implementation plan.
/write-plan [feature or task]
OUTPUT:
## Implementation Plan: [Feature Name]
### Goal
[Single sentence describing the outcome]
### Success Criteria
- [ ] Criterion 1
- [ ] Criterion 2
- [ ] Criterion 3
### Steps (with estimates)
#### Step 1: [Name] (~Xh)
- What: [specific actions]
- Files: [files to modify/create]
- Dependencies: [what must exist first]
- Verification: [how to confirm done]
#### Step 2: [Name] (~Xh)
...
### Risks & Mitigations
| Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|-----------|--------|------------|
| Risk 1 | Medium | High | Plan B if... |
### Open Questions
- [Questions to resolve before starting]
Phase 3: Execute Plan
Purpose: Implement the plan systematically with checkpoints.
/execute-plan [plan reference]
EXECUTION PATTERN:
1. Load the plan
2. For each step:
a. Announce: "Starting Step X: [name]"
b. Execute actions
c. Verify completion
d. Report: "Step X complete. [brief summary]"
3. After completion:
a. Run all verification criteria
b. Report final status
Structured Patterns
Hypothesis-Driven Development
PATTERN: Test assumptions before committing
Before implementing:
1. State hypothesis: "If we [action], then [expected outcome]"
2. Define experiment: "To test this, we will [minimal test]"
3. Execute experiment
4. Evaluate: "Hypothesis confirmed/rejected because [evidence]"
5. Proceed or pivot based on result
Incremental Implementation
PATTERN: Build in verifiable increments
For complex features:
1. Identify smallest testable unit
2. Implement and verify
3. Expand scope incrementally
4. Verify at each expansion
5. Integrate and verify whole
Example:
Feature: User authentication
- Increment 1: Basic login form (no backend)
- Increment 2: API endpoint (hardcoded response)
- Increment 3: Database integration
- Increment 4: Session management
- Increment 5: Password reset flow
Progress Tracking
PATTERN: Maintain visible progress
After each action:
[X] Step 1: Create database schema
[X] Step 2: Implement API endpoints
[IN PROGRESS] Step 3: Add frontend form
[ ] Step 4: Write tests
[ ] Step 5: Deploy to staging
Current: Step 3 of 5 (60% complete)
Blockers: None
Next: Complete form validation
Work in Progress (WIP) Limits
PATTERN: Limit concurrent work to improve flow
WIP limits restrict maximum items in each workflow stage.
Benefits: Makes blockers visible, reduces context switching,
often increases throughput.
RECOMMENDED LIMITS:
| Level | Limit | Rationale |
|-------|-------|-----------|
| Individual | 2-3 tasks | Minimize context switching |
| Team (stories) | Team size + 1 | Allow pairing without blocking |
| In Progress column | 3-5 items | Force completion before starting |
| Code Review | 2-3 PRs | Prevent review bottleneck |
SETTING WIP LIMITS:
1. Start with team size + 1
2. Monitor for 2-4 weeks
3. If limits never reached -> lower them
4. If constantly blocked -> investigate bottleneck, don't raise limit
5. Adjust based on actual flow data
WHEN TO VIOLATE (thoughtfully):
- Emergency production fix
- Unblocking another team
- Document the exception and review in retro
Session Management
Starting a Session
Session initialized.
- Project: [name]
- Goal: [today's objective]
- Context loaded: [files, previous decisions]
- Plan status: [steps remaining]
Ready to continue from: [last checkpoint]
Ending a Session
/summarize
OUTPUT:
## Session Summary
### Completed
- [List of completed items]
### In Progress
- [Current state of incomplete work]
### Decisions Made
- [Key decisions with rationale]
### Next Session
- [ ] [First task for next time]
- [ ] [Second task]
### Context to Preserve
[Critical information for continuity]
Decision Framework
When faced with choices:
1. State the decision clearly
2. List options (2-4)
3. For each option:
- Pros
- Cons
- Effort estimate
- Risk level
4. Recommendation with justification
5. Reversibility assessment
Example:
Decision: How to implement authentication?
| Option | Pros | Cons | Effort | Risk |
|--------|------|------|--------|------|
| JWT | Stateless, scalable | Token management | 2 days | Low |
| Sessions | Simple, secure | Server state | 1 day | Low |
| OAuth only | No passwords | External dependency | 3 days | Medium |
Recommendation: Sessions for MVP, plan JWT migration for scale.
Integration with Other Skills
With Testing Skill
/write-plan with TDD:
Step 1: Write failing test
Step 2: Implement minimal code
Step 3: Verify test passes
Step 4: Refactor
Step 5: Add edge case tests
With Architecture Skill
/brainstorm system design:
1. Requirements clarification
2. Component identification
3. Interface definition
4. Data flow mapping
5. Implementation plan
Definition of Ready / Done (DoR/DoD)
assets/template-dor-dod.md - Checklists for work readiness and completion.
assets/template-work-item-ticket.md - Ticket template with DoR/DoD and testable acceptance criteria.
Key Sections
- Definition of Ready - User story, bug, technical task checklists
- Definition of Done - Feature, bug fix, spike completion criteria
- Acceptance Criteria Templates - Gherkin (Given/When/Then), bullet list, rule-based
- Estimation Guidelines - Story point reference scale (1-21+), slicing strategies
- Planning Levels - Roadmap -> Milestone -> Sprint -> Task hierarchy
- Cross-Functional Coordination - RACI matrix, handoff checklists
Do / Avoid
GOOD: Do
- Check DoR before pulling work into sprint
- Verify DoD before marking complete
- Size stories using reference scale
- Slice large stories (>8 points)
- Document acceptance criteria upfront
- Include risk buffer in estimates
- Coordinate handoffs explicitly
BAD: Avoid
- Starting work without clear acceptance criteria
- Declaring "done" without testing
- Estimating without understanding scope
- Working on stories too big to finish in sprint
- Skipping code review "to save time"
- Deploying without staging verification
- Assuming handoffs happen automatically
Anti-Patterns
| Anti-Pattern | Problem | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| No DoR | Unclear requirements discovered mid-sprint | Gate sprint entry with DoR |
| Soft DoD | "Done" means different things | Written DoD checklist |
| Mega-stories | Never finish, hard to track | Slice to <8 points |
| Missing AC | Built wrong thing | Gherkin format AC |
| No ownership | Work falls through cracks | RACI for every epic |
| Hope-based estimates | Always late | Use reference scale + buffer |
Optional: AI/Automation
Note: AI can assist but should not replace human judgment on priorities and acceptance.
- Generate acceptance criteria - Draft from story description (needs review)
- Suggest story slicing - Based on complexity analysis
- Dependency mapping - Identify blocking relationships
- AI-augmented planning - Use LLMs to draft plans, but validate assumptions
AI-Assisted Planning Best Practices
- Planning first - Create a plan before coding
- Scope management - Keep tasks small and verifiable
- Iterative steps - Ship in increments with checkpoints
- Human oversight - Validate assumptions and outputs (tests, logs, metrics)
Bounded Claims
- AI-generated acceptance criteria need human review
- Story point estimates require team calibration
- Dependency mapping suggestions need validation
- AI impact on delivery stability requires monitoring
Navigation
Resources
- references/planning-templates.md - Plan templates for common scenarios
- references/session-patterns.md - Multi-session project management
- references/flow-metrics.md - DORA metrics, WIP limits, flow optimization
- assets/template-dor-dod.md - DoR/DoD checklists, estimation, cross-functional coordination
- assets/template-work-item-ticket.md - Work item ticket template (DoR/DoD + acceptance criteria)
- data/sources.json - Workflow methodology references
Related Skills
- ../software-architecture-design/SKILL.md - System design planning
- ../docs-ai-prd/SKILL.md - Requirements to plan conversion
- ../qa-testing-strategy/SKILL.md - TDD workflow integration
- ../qa-debugging/SKILL.md - Systematic debugging plans