claude-engineering-plugin/plugins/compounding-engineering/commands/workflows/plan.md

name, description, argument-hint

name	description	argument-hint
plan	Transform feature descriptions into well-structured project plans following conventions	[feature description, bug report, or improvement idea]

Create a plan for a new feature or bug fix

Introduction

Note: The current year is 2025. Use this when dating plans and searching for recent documentation.

Transform feature descriptions, bug reports, or improvement ideas into well-structured markdown files issues that follow project conventions and best practices. This command provides flexible detail levels to match your needs.

Feature Description

<feature_description> #$ARGUMENTS </feature_description>

If the feature description above is empty, ask the user: "What would you like to plan? Please describe the feature, bug fix, or improvement you have in mind."

Do not proceed until you have a clear feature description from the user.

Main Tasks

1. Repository Research & Context Gathering

First, I need to understand the project's conventions and existing patterns, leveraging all available resources and use paralel subagents to do this.

Runn these three agents in paralel at the same time:

• Task repo-research-analyst(feature_description)
• Task best-practices-researcher(feature_description)
• Task framework-docs-researcher(feature_description)

Reference Collection:

• Document all research findings with specific file paths (e.g., app/services/example_service.rb:42)
• Include URLs to external documentation and best practices guides
• Create a reference list of similar issues or PRs (e.g., #123, #456)
• Note any team conventions discovered in CLAUDE.md or team documentation

2. Issue Planning & Structure

Think like a product manager - what would make this issue clear and actionable? Consider multiple perspectives

Title & Categorization:

• Draft clear, searchable issue title using conventional format (e.g., feat:, fix:, docs:)
• Determine issue type: enhancement, bug, refactor

Stakeholder Analysis:

• Identify who will be affected by this issue (end users, developers, operations)
• Consider implementation complexity and required expertise

Content Planning:

• Choose appropriate detail level based on issue complexity and audience
• List all necessary sections for the chosen template
• Gather supporting materials (error logs, screenshots, design mockups)
• Prepare code examples or reproduction steps if applicable, name the mock filenames in the lists

3. SpecFlow Analysis

After planning the issue structure, run SpecFlow Analyzer to validate and refine the feature specification:

• Task spec-flow-analyzer(feature_description, research_findings)

SpecFlow Analyzer Output:

• Review SpecFlow analysis results
• Incorporate any identified gaps or edge cases into the issue
• Update acceptance criteria based on SpecFlow findings

4. Choose Implementation Detail Level

Select how comprehensive you want the issue to be, simpler is mostly better.

📄 MINIMAL (Quick Issue)

Best for: Simple bugs, small improvements, clear features

Includes:

• Problem statement or feature description
• Basic acceptance criteria
• Essential context only

Structure:

[Brief problem/feature description]

## Acceptance Criteria

- [ ] Core requirement 1
- [ ] Core requirement 2

## Context

[Any critical information]

## MVP

### test.rb

```ruby
class Test
  def initialize
    @name = "test"
  end
end
```

## References

- Related issue: #[issue_number]
- Documentation: [relevant_docs_url]

#### 📋 MORE (Standard Issue)

**Best for:** Most features, complex bugs, team collaboration

**Includes everything from MINIMAL plus:**

- Detailed background and motivation
- Technical considerations
- Success metrics
- Dependencies and risks
- Basic implementation suggestions

**Structure:**

```markdown
## Overview

[Comprehensive description]

## Problem Statement / Motivation

[Why this matters]

## Proposed Solution

[High-level approach]

## Technical Considerations

- Architecture impacts
- Performance implications
- Security considerations

## Acceptance Criteria

- [ ] Detailed requirement 1
- [ ] Detailed requirement 2
- [ ] Testing requirements

## Success Metrics

[How we measure success]

## Dependencies & Risks

[What could block or complicate this]

## References & Research

- Similar implementations: [file_path:line_number]
- Best practices: [documentation_url]
- Related PRs: #[pr_number]
```

#### 📚 A LOT (Comprehensive Issue)

**Best for:** Major features, architectural changes, complex integrations

**Includes everything from MORE plus:**

- Detailed implementation plan with phases
- Alternative approaches considered
- Extensive technical specifications
- Resource requirements and timeline
- Future considerations and extensibility
- Risk mitigation strategies
- Documentation requirements

**Structure:**

```markdown
## Overview

[Executive summary]

## Problem Statement

[Detailed problem analysis]

## Proposed Solution

[Comprehensive solution design]

## Technical Approach

### Architecture

[Detailed technical design]

### Implementation Phases

#### Phase 1: [Foundation]

- Tasks and deliverables
- Success criteria
- Estimated effort

#### Phase 2: [Core Implementation]

- Tasks and deliverables
- Success criteria
- Estimated effort

#### Phase 3: [Polish & Optimization]

- Tasks and deliverables
- Success criteria
- Estimated effort

## Alternative Approaches Considered

[Other solutions evaluated and why rejected]

## Acceptance Criteria

### Functional Requirements

- [ ] Detailed functional criteria

### Non-Functional Requirements

- [ ] Performance targets
- [ ] Security requirements
- [ ] Accessibility standards

### Quality Gates

- [ ] Test coverage requirements
- [ ] Documentation completeness
- [ ] Code review approval

## Success Metrics

[Detailed KPIs and measurement methods]

## Dependencies & Prerequisites

[Detailed dependency analysis]

## Risk Analysis & Mitigation

[Comprehensive risk assessment]

## Resource Requirements

[Team, time, infrastructure needs]

## Future Considerations

[Extensibility and long-term vision]

## Documentation Plan

[What docs need updating]

## References & Research

### Internal References

- Architecture decisions: [file_path:line_number]
- Similar features: [file_path:line_number]
- Configuration: [file_path:line_number]

### External References

- Framework documentation: [url]
- Best practices guide: [url]
- Industry standards: [url]

### Related Work

- Previous PRs: #[pr_numbers]
- Related issues: #[issue_numbers]
- Design documents: [links]
```

### 5. Issue Creation & Formatting

<thinking>
Apply best practices for clarity and actionability, making the issue easy to scan and understand
</thinking>

**Content Formatting:**

- [ ] Use clear, descriptive headings with proper hierarchy (##, ###)
- [ ] Include code examples in triple backticks with language syntax highlighting
- [ ] Add screenshots/mockups if UI-related (drag & drop or use image hosting)
- [ ] Use task lists (- [ ]) for trackable items that can be checked off
- [ ] Add collapsible sections for lengthy logs or optional details using `<details>` tags
- [ ] Apply appropriate emoji for visual scanning (🐛 bug, ✨ feature, 📚 docs, ♻️ refactor)

**Cross-Referencing:**

- [ ] Link to related issues/PRs using #number format
- [ ] Reference specific commits with SHA hashes when relevant
- [ ] Link to code using GitHub's permalink feature (press 'y' for permanent link)
- [ ] Mention relevant team members with @username if needed
- [ ] Add links to external resources with descriptive text

**Code & Examples:**

```markdown
# Good example with syntax highlighting and line references
```

```ruby
# app/services/user_service.rb:42
def process_user(user)

# Implementation here

end
```

Collapsible error logs

Full error stacktrace

Error details here...

AI-Era Considerations:

• Account for accelerated development with AI pair programming
• Include prompts or instructions that worked well during research
• Note which AI tools were used for initial exploration (Claude, Copilot, etc.)
• Emphasize comprehensive testing given rapid implementation
• Document any AI-generated code that needs human review

6. Final Review & Submission

Pre-submission Checklist:

• Title is searchable and descriptive
• Labels accurately categorize the issue
• All template sections are complete
• Links and references are working
• Acceptance criteria are measurable
• Add names of files in pseudo code examples and todo lists
• Add an ERD mermaid diagram if applicable for new model changes

Output Format

Write the plan to plans/<issue_title>.md

Post-Generation Options

After writing the plan file, use the AskUserQuestion tool to present these options:

Question: "Plan ready at plans/<issue_title>.md. What would you like to do next?"

Options:

1. Start /work - Begin implementing this plan
2. Run /plan_review - Get feedback from reviewers (DHH, Kieran, Simplicity)
3. Simplify - Reduce detail level
4. Rework - Change approach or request specific changes

Based on selection:

• /work → Call the /work command with the plan file path
• /plan_review → Call the /plan_review command with the plan file path
• Simplify → Ask "What should I simplify?" then regenerate simpler version
• Rework → Ask "What would you like changed?" then regenerate with changes
• Other (automatically provided) → Accept free text, act on it

Loop back to options after Simplify/Rework until user selects /work or /plan_review.

NEVER CODE! Just research and write the plan.