implementation-plans
Creates concise, executable implementation plans for solo developer working with AI agents. Validates assumptions, avoids timelines, focuses on actionable steps with clear human/AI delegation.
When & Why to Use This Skill
This Claude skill generates concise, executable implementation plans tailored for solo developers and small teams working with AI agents. It eliminates 'enterprise theater'—such as arbitrary timelines and complex approval gates—focusing instead on technical dependencies, assumption validation, and clear human-AI delegation to ensure rapid, error-free execution.
Use Cases
- Rapid Feature Scaffolding: Breaking down complex feature requests into a sequence of specific, AI-ready prompts and verification steps to accelerate development.
- Technical Risk Mitigation: Identifying and validating critical technical assumptions, such as API permissions or data formats, before the implementation phase begins.
- Solo Developer Workflow Optimization: Streamlining the transition from architectural concepts to line-by-line code execution without the overhead of traditional project management tools.
- Data-Driven Debugging: Creating a structured plan to inspect actual system states and data before attempting code fixes, preventing the 'assumption cascade' failure pattern.
| name | implementation-plans |
|---|---|
| description | Creates concise, executable implementation plans for solo developer working with AI agents. Validates assumptions, avoids timelines, focuses on actionable steps with clear human/AI delegation. |
Implementation Plans Skill
This skill guides creation of implementation plans for solo implementers working with AI agents (not teams requiring approval).
Core Principles
Context
- Solo implementer: Bobby + AI agents, not requiring team approvals or stakeholder sign-offs
- Small team: 3 engineers with different focus areas
- Fast execution: Plans completed in days/hours, not weeks
- AI execution model: All implementation steps involve AI agents
Non-Negotiables
- No timelines or estimates - Provide sequence and dependencies only
- Validate assumptions first - Ask clarifying questions or flag for verification
- Brutally concise - If team ignores it, it's too long
- AI-ready steps - Frame as "Have AI do X" vs "Review/verify Y manually"
- No stakeholder theater - Skip approval phases, sign-off steps, team alignment meetings
Process
1. Start with Clarifying Questions
Before writing any plan, ask questions to validate assumptions:
- What does the actual data look like?
- Do we have confirmed access/permissions?
- Are there known constraints or requirements?
- Which tools/libraries/versions are we using?
2. Build the Plan
Structure:
## [Task Name]
### Verification Steps (if assumptions can't be validated upfront)
1. Verify [assumption] by [method]
### Implementation
1. Have AI [specific action]
- Context: [relevant details]
- Expected output: [what to verify]
2. Review [output] for [specific concerns]
3. Manually verify [critical check]
### Dependencies
- [What must complete first]
### 🚨 Unvalidated Assumptions
- [List assumptions that need verification during execution]
Keep total plan under 500 words. If you need more detail, split into main plan + technical appendix.
3. Focus on Reality
- If you can't validate something with web search or available context, ASK or FLAG it
- Never confidently declare solutions built on unverified assumptions
- When debugging, check actual data before analyzing code
- Remember: obvious data issues > complex code analysis
Common Failure Patterns
❌ The Assumption Cascade
Building multi-step plans on unverified assumptions that collapse when reality doesn't match.
Fix: Front-load verification or flag assumptions explicitly
❌ The Confident Wrong Answer
Declaring root cause without seeing actual data or system state.
Fix: Include data inspection steps before solution steps
❌ The Enterprise Theater
Including approval gates, week-based timelines, team alignment meetings.
Fix: Assume work is approved, sequence steps by technical dependency only
Progressive Disclosure
For detailed guidance, reference these files:
Validation practices: validation-checklist.md
- Comprehensive assumption checklist
- Common technology gotchas
- Data validation patterns
AI delegation: ai-delegation-patterns.md
- How to frame steps for AI execution
- When human review is critical
- Context requirements for AI tasks
Examples: examples/
- Good plan: database migration
- Bad plan: stakeholder-heavy approach
- Complex plan: RAG pipeline implementation
Load these only when additional context would help create a better plan.
Quick Reference
Good step: "Have AI generate migration script adding preferences JSONB column with rollback"
Bad step: "Update the database" (too vague)
Good verification: "Check current schema: SELECT column_name..."
Bad verification: "Ensure database is ready" (unclear how)
Good flag: "🚨 Verify: Azure AI Search tier supports semantic ranking"
Bad flag: Assuming it works without checking