Flow Next Plan

Flow plan

Turn a rough idea into an epic with tasks in .flow/. This skill does not write code.

Follow this skill and linked workflows exactly. Deviations cause drift, bad gates, retries, and user frustration.

IMPORTANT: This plugin uses .flow/ for ALL task tracking. Do NOT use markdown TODOs, plan files, TodoWrite, or other tracking methods. All task state must be read and written via flowctl.

CRITICAL: flowctl is BUNDLED — NOT installed globally. which flowctl will fail (expected). Always use:

FLOWCTL="${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/flowctl"
$FLOWCTL <command>

Pre-check: Local setup version

If .flow/meta.json exists and has setup_version, compare to plugin version:

SETUP_VER=$(jq -r '.setup_version // empty' .flow/meta.json 2>/dev/null)
PLUGIN_VER=$(jq -r '.version' "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/.claude-plugin/plugin.json")
if [[ -n "$SETUP_VER" ]]; then
  [[ "$SETUP_VER" = "$PLUGIN_VER" ]] || echo "Plugin updated to v${PLUGIN_VER}. Run /flow-next:setup to refresh local scripts (current: v${SETUP_VER})."
fi

Continue regardless (non-blocking).

Role: product-minded planner with strong repo awareness. Goal: produce an epic with tasks that match existing conventions and reuse points. Task size: every task must fit one /flow-next:work iteration (~100k tokens max). If it won't, split it.

The Golden Rule: No Implementation Code

Plans are specs, not implementations. Do NOT write the code that will be implemented.

Code IS allowed:

• Signatures/interfaces (what, not how): function validate(input: string): Result
• Patterns from this repo (with file:line ref): "Follow pattern at src/auth.ts:42"
• Recent/surprising APIs (from docs-scout): "React 19 changed X — use useOptimistic instead"
• Non-obvious gotchas (from practice-scout): "Must call cleanup() or memory leaks"

Code is FORBIDDEN:

• Complete function implementations
• Full class/module bodies
• "Here's what you'll write" blocks
• Copy-paste ready snippets (>10 lines)

Why: Implementation happens in /flow-next:work with fresh context. Writing it here wastes tokens in planning, review, AND implementation — then causes drift when the implementer does it differently anyway.

Input

Full request: $ARGUMENTS

Accepts:

• Feature/bug description in natural language
• Flow epic ID fn-N-slug (e.g., fn-1-add-oauth) or legacy fn-N/fn-N-xxx to refine existing epic
• Flow task ID fn-N-slug.M (e.g., fn-1-add-oauth.2) or legacy fn-N.M/fn-N-xxx.M to refine specific task
• Chained instructions like "then review with /flow-next:plan-review"

Examples:

• /flow-next:plan Add OAuth login for users
• /flow-next:plan fn-1-add-oauth
• /flow-next:plan fn-1 (legacy formats fn-1, fn-1-xxx still supported)
• /flow-next:plan fn-1-add-oauth then review via /flow-next:plan-review

If empty, ask: "What should I plan? Give me the feature or bug in 1-5 sentences."

FIRST: Parse Options or Ask Questions

Check configured backend:

REVIEW_BACKEND=$($FLOWCTL review-backend)

Returns: ASK (not configured), or rp/codex/none (configured).

Option Parsing (skip questions if found in arguments)

Parse the arguments for these patterns. If found, use them and skip questions:

Research approach:

• --research=rp or --research rp or "use rp" or "context-scout" or "use repoprompt" → context-scout (errors at runtime if rp-cli missing)
• --research=grep or --research grep or "use grep" or "repo-scout" or "fast" → repo-scout

Review mode:

• --review=codex or "review with codex" or "codex review" or "use codex" → Codex CLI (GPT 5.2 High)
• --review=rp or "review with rp" or "rp chat" or "repoprompt review" → RepoPrompt chat (via flowctl rp chat-send)
• --review=export or "export review" or "external llm" → export for external LLM
• --review=none or --no-review or "no review" or "skip review" → no review

If options NOT found in arguments

Plan depth (parse from args or ask):

• --depth=short or "quick" or "minimal" → SHORT
• --depth=standard or "normal" → STANDARD
• --depth=deep or "comprehensive" or "detailed" → DEEP
• Default: SHORT (simpler is better)

If REVIEW_BACKEND is rp, codex, or none (already configured): Only ask research question. Show override hint:

Quick setup: Use RepoPrompt for deeper context?
a) Yes, context-scout (slower, thorough)
b) No, repo-scout (faster)

(Reply: "a", "b", or just tell me)
(Tip: --depth=short|standard|deep, --review=rp|codex|none)

If REVIEW_BACKEND is ASK (not configured): Ask all questions (do NOT use AskUserQuestion tool):

Quick setup before planning:

1. **Plan depth** — How detailed?
   a) Short — problem, acceptance, key context only
   b) Standard (default) — + approach, risks, test notes
   c) Deep — + phases, alternatives, rollout plan

2. **Research** — Use RepoPrompt for deeper context?
   a) Yes, context-scout (slower, thorough)
   b) No, repo-scout (faster)

3. **Review** — Run Carmack-level review after?
   a) Codex CLI
   b) RepoPrompt
   c) Export for external LLM
   d) None (configure later)

(Reply: "1a 2b 3d", or just tell me naturally)

Wait for response. Parse naturally — user may reply terse ("1a 2b") or ramble via voice.

Defaults when empty/ambiguous:

• Depth = standard (balanced detail)
• Research = grep (repo-scout)
• Review = configured backend if set, else none

Workflow

Read steps.md and follow each step in order.

CRITICAL — Step 1 (Research): You MUST launch ALL scouts listed in steps.md in ONE parallel Task call. Do NOT skip scouts or run them sequentially. Each scout provides unique signal.

If user chose review:

• Option 2a: run /flow-next:plan-review after Step 4, fix issues until it passes
• Option 2b: run /flow-next:plan-review with export mode after Step 4

Output

All plans go into .flow/:

• Epic: .flow/epics/fn-N-slug.json + .flow/specs/fn-N-slug.md
• Tasks: .flow/tasks/fn-N-slug.M.json + .flow/tasks/fn-N-slug.M.md

Never write plan files outside .flow/. Never use TodoWrite for task tracking.

Output rules

• Only create/update epics and tasks via flowctl
• No code changes
• No plan files outside .flow/