plan

Convert PM planning triggers into implementation plan documents with acceptance criteria.

5|2|Updated Mar 20, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/dbc-oduffy/coordinator-claude --skill plan-dbc-oduffy
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: plan
Source: https://github.com/dbc-oduffy/coordinator-claude/tree/main/plugins/coordinator/skills/plan
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/dbc-oduffy/coordinator-claude --skill plan-dbc-oduffy

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

The plan skill converts PM planning triggers into a decision-weight plan document with the right altitude, evidence, and review gates, so complex implementation work doesn’t start with ambiguity or wrong substrate.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Triage plan vs. alternative doctrine: Determines when to create a plan, when to use shape/brainstorm harnesses, and when to surface architectural-tier concerns to the PM.
  • Pre-write substrate verification: Confirms problem shape, validates file paths and framework seams against disk, performs negative-search for prior teardown reversals, and checks cross-plan coordination needs.
  • Doctrine-based plan composition: Applies PM lenses (scope mode, acceptance criteria testability, refactor vs patch, YAGNI, “soon=now”), structures executor handoffs, and forces coordinator:review for non-trivial plans.

Quick Start

Use the plan skill when the EM is about to draft implementation for decision-weight work by invoking it with the prompt “write a plan” or “break this down” for the PM’s request.

Frequently Asked Questions about plan

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I draft decision-ready implementation plans for complex multi-file work?

To draft decision-ready implementation plans, you convert PM planning triggers into structured documents by verifying file paths against disk and composing doctrine-based acceptance criteria. This ensures complex work starts with proper evidence and review gates.

When should I create a formal implementation plan instead of using a brainstorm harness?

You should create a formal implementation plan for new abstractions, cross-system coordination, and reversals of prior decisions. Use brainstorm harnesses for lighter ideation, and surface architectural-tier concerns to the PM when the scope exceeds patch-level work.

How do I structure executor handoffs with testable acceptance criteria?

Structure executor handoffs by applying doctrine lenses like scope mode and acceptance criteria testability to the plan document. This forces a coordinator review for non-trivial implementations, ensuring the executor receives clear, validated implementation scope.

Can I use cross-plan coordination for reversing prior architectural teardowns?

Yes, you can use cross-plan coordination for reversing prior architectural teardowns. The planning process performs a negative-search for prior teardown reversals on disk to validate the context, ensuring the new implementation plan properly addresses the decision reversal.

What are the limitations of using a patch approach instead of a refactor for implementation scope?

A patch approach risks accumulating technical debt when the implementation scope actually requires a refactor. The planning process applies YAGNI and refactor-vs-patch doctrine lenses to determine the correct altitude, preventing ambiguous or mismatched substrate work.