1---2name: create-plan3description: Creates, reviews, and improves lean implementation plans through orchestrated research, evidence-backed synthesis, and iterative independent review closure. Use this skill when the user asks to plan a feature or change, create an implementation handoff, or review or improve an unimplemented plan before coding. Do not use to implement a plan, audit completed implementation against a plan, or answer a small conceptual question that needs no implementation handoff.4license: MIT5---67# Create Plan89## Hard rules1011- **Plan only** — never implement.12- Allowed writes: `.plans/<kebab-name>.md`, and `.reviews/*-decomplex.md` when needed.13- Evidence-backed. Smallest design. No speculative scope.14- **Ask user** on material ambiguity (scope/behavior/architecture/migration/risk/complexity). No shaky assumptions.15- **Delegate by default** for research and review when safe. “Small/easy” ≠ skip subagents.16- Leverage subagents — built-in, extensions/plugins, or skills. Follow `use-subagents` policy; use native subagents, extensions / plugins, or other skills17- Main agent owns synthesis, plan writes, dispositions, delivery.18- Child/reviewer output = evidence, never acceptance. Findings never auto-enter the plan.19- Prefer simpler fixes. Stuck review (2 failed rounds / recurrence / no progress) → ask user.2021### Load or stop2223- Before draft: read [`assets/implementation-plan-template.md`](assets/implementation-plan-template.md).24- Before finalize (and after material edits): read [`references/plan-quality-checklist.md`](references/plan-quality-checklist.md).25- Missing resources → stop. Don’t invent substitutes.2627### Tasks must have2829- Stable IDs30- **Change** as bullets (one concrete edit/behavior each)31- Starts-at paths/symbols (non-exhaustive)32- Exact verify commands + expected signals33- Each behavior-changing task names an existing/planned test path or suite, the observable behavior, boundary, or regression it protects, and the narrowest credible repository-conventional layer; or justifies omitting automation and gives alternate validation34- Omit empty optionals35- Key files table: path · why · plan impact3637## Sequence38391. **Frame** — request, repo instructions, existing plans → outcome, scope, non-goals, risks, validation. Don’t deep-explore in parent when a research lane can.402. **Load template.**413. **Research** — enumerate questions; **delegate by default** (one question/scope/stop per lane). Inspect relevant existing tests, framework/configuration, and repository commands. External only if decision-relevant. Verify critical claims.424. **Resolve gates** — still ambiguous? **ask user** before drafting as fact.435. **Synthesize** — smallest approach; map findings → decisions/tasks/checks/non-goals/gates; drop fluff.446. **Draft** — adapt template; flat tasks default; phases only for real boundaries; no review ledgers in the handoff.457. **Complexity** — structural draft → `decomplex` Prevention if available, else built-in gate. Complexity-increasing accept → triage; doubt → ask user.468. **Review** — consequential plans: delegate fresh independent reviewers → disposition (`Accept`/`Validate`/`Reject`/`Ask user`/`Block`) → revise → re-review until `Clear`. Small/unavailable: parent checklist + independence limit.479. **Checklist → deliver** — save under `.plans/` (or chat + no-write reason). Report path, gates, decisions, fallbacks, risks.4849## Stop5051- Missing template/checklist → stop52- Required research/review unsafe/unavailable → block/escalate53- Persistent disagreement or uncertainty → ask user