tomevault-io 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]
### Risks & Mitigations
| Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|-----------|--------|------------|
| Risk 1 | Medium | High | Plan B if... |
### Open Questions
- [Questions to resolve before starting]
Dependency Graph for Parallel Execution
When a plan will be executed with multiple subagents, each task must declare its dependencies explicitly. This enables the orchestrator to determine which tasks can run in parallel.
### Task Dependency Graph
| Task ID | Name | depends_on | Files | Agent Scope |
|---------|------|------------|-------|-------------|
| T1 | Setup database schema | [] | db/schema.sql | db-engineer |
| T2 | Create API routes | [T1] | src/routes/*.ts | backend-dev |
| T3 | Build auth middleware | [T1] | src/middleware/auth.ts | backend-dev |
| T4 | Frontend components | [] | src/components/*.tsx | frontend-dev |
| T5 | Integration tests | [T2, T3, T4] | tests/integration/*.test.ts | qa-agent |
Rules for dependency graphs:
- Every task declares
depends_on: []with explicit task IDs (empty array = no blockers). - Tasks with no dependencies can start immediately (in parallel).
- No circular dependencies — the graph must be a DAG (directed acyclic graph).
- Each task should specify its file ownership to prevent parallel conflicts.
Parallel Execution Strategies
Swarm Waves (Accuracy-First) — Launch one subagent per unblocked task, in dependency-respecting waves. Wait for each wave to complete before launching the next. Best for production code and complex interdependencies.
Super Swarms (Speed-First) — Launch as many subagents as possible at once, regardless of dependencies. Best for prototypes and greenfield scaffolding. Expect merge conflicts.
See references/planning-templates.md for the full swarm-ready plan template.
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
Worktree-First Delivery
For production coding sessions, wrap /execute-plan with a delivery guardrail:
- Create one isolated worktree per feature.
- Execute only the approved plan scope in that worktree.
- Run repo-defined quality gate(s) before PR (example:
npm run test:analytics-gate). - Open one focused PR per feature branch.
./scripts/git/feature-workflow.sh start <feature-slug>
cd .worktrees/<feature-slug>
# implement plan steps
../../scripts/git/feature-workflow.sh gate
../../scripts/git/feature-workflow.sh pr --title "feat: <summary>"
Agent Session Management
Key rules from production experience (Feb 2026):
- One feature per session. Context exhaustion causes rework. A sprawling session (38 messages, 3+ continuations) produced multiple errors; a focused session (5 messages) shipped clean.
- Write a plan before touching 3+ files. Sessions with pre-written numbered plans had near-zero rework.
- Verify SDK types before executing plan steps. Documentation may describe APIs that no longer match actual TypeScript definitions.
See references/session-patterns.md for the full production evidence table and checkpoint protocol for long sessions.
Command Preflight Protocol
Before broad edits, tests, or reviews — run a 60-second preflight:
pwd/git branch --show-current/ls -latest -e <path>to verify target paths before heavy commandsnpx <tool> --helpto validate flags before first use- Quote paths containing
[],*,?, or spaces
See references/operational-checklists.md for the full git/branch safety preflight, E2E/server preflight, shell safety gate, and SDK type verification.
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
Build in verifiable increments: smallest testable unit → implement and verify → expand scope → verify at each expansion → integrate and verify whole.
See references/planning-templates.md for an authentication feature example with 5 increments.
Progress Tracking
PATTERN: Maintain visible progress
[X] Step 1: Create database schema
[X] Step 2: Implement API endpoints
[IN PROGRESS] Step 3: Add frontend form
[ ] Step 4: Write tests
Current: Step 3 of 4 (75% complete)
Blockers: None
Next: Complete form validation
Work in Progress (WIP) Limits
Limit concurrent work: individual (2-3 tasks), team stories (team size + 1), in-progress column (3-5 items), code review (2-3 PRs). If limits are never reached, lower them. If constantly blocked, investigate the bottleneck.
See references/planning-templates.md for the full WIP limits reference and setting guidelines.
Milestone Checkpointing and Scope Budgeting
For multi-step execution, constrain scope and checkpoint progress at milestone boundaries.
- Define explicit session scope at start:
1-2deliverables only. - If a new request expands beyond scope, create a follow-up milestone.
Milestone Checkpoint Contract
At each milestone, record:
- completed outputs (files/features/tests)
- verification results (commands + pass/fail)
- unresolved blockers
- next bounded action
Stop Conditions
Stop and rescope when any occur:
- repeated nonzero failures without new evidence
- context churn (re-reading same files repeatedly)
- more than 3 independent domains active in one session
See references/session-scope-budgeting.md for full scope budgeting model and enforcement rules.
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]
### 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 / Risk
4. Recommendation with justification
5. Reversibility assessment
Example:
| 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 / Done checklists, Acceptance Criteria templates (Gherkin), Estimation Guidelines (story point scale 1-21+), Planning Levels (Roadmap → Sprint → Task), Cross-Functional RACI.
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
BAD: Avoid
- Starting work without clear acceptance criteria
- Declaring "done" without testing
- Working on stories too big to finish in sprint
- Skipping code review "to save time"
- Deploying without staging verification
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 |
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-generated criteria and estimates require human calibration before committing to them.
Navigation
Resources
- references/planning-templates.md - Plan templates, incremental implementation, WIP limits
- references/session-patterns.md - Multi-session management, production lessons (Feb 2026)
- references/session-scope-budgeting.md - Scope budgeting rules and stop/rescope criteria
- references/operational-checklists.md - Preflight protocols, verification, failure ledger, subagent limits
- references/flow-metrics.md - DORA metrics, WIP limits, flow optimization
- references/agile-ceremony-patterns.md - Sprint ceremonies, retrospectives, facilitation patterns
- references/technical-debt-management.md - Debt classification, prioritization, remediation workflows
- references/remote-async-workflows.md - Async-first patterns, distributed team coordination
- assets/template-dor-dod.md - DoR/DoD checklists, estimation, cross-functional coordination
- assets/template-work-item-ticket.md - Work item ticket template
- assets/template-milestone-checkpoint.md - Milestone checkpoint record
- 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
Converted and distributed by TomeVault — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.