mcpbeat Sign in

Give Plan Skill for Claude

Use when the user wants a written, reviewable plan or spec produced before coding starts. Triggers on: mapping out changes without implementing, thinking through risks of upgrades or migrations, evaluating approaches before committing to one, writing specs for team review, phasing work into stages, or any request that explicitly defers coding ('don't implement yet', 'before we build'). The distinguishing signal is that the user wants a plan artifact — not implementation, not a conversational answer. MUST activates inside Claude's native plan mode to have a better planning behavior.

917 tokens
context cost
the whole folder, loaded on every use
1
files
instructions only
0
copies elsewhere
how many repositories repackaged it
111
stars on the repo
on the repository, not the skill itself

Install

one command, takes just this skill from the repository
npx skills add https://github.com/avibebuilder/claude-prime --skill give-plan

What it tells the agent to use

found in the instruction text
Bash runs shell commands — read the instruction before connecting

The instruction itself

9 sections, as written by the author

ultrathink

Core contract

Figure out the right approach, write a plan the user can inspect, and stop. Planning is not approval to implement — wait for explicit go-ahead before writing any code.

  • Clarify only what would materially change the plan.
  • Read the codebase before making claims. Distinguish confirmed facts, inferences, and unknowns — never hide uncertainty.
  • Optimize for reviewability over momentum.

If already in native plan mode, this skill shapes *how* to plan; plan mode provides the workflow structure and must follow this skill guidelines.

Process

Check conversation context and skip completed steps.

1. Clarify the planning goal

What kind of plan? Scoped implementation, phased feature, migration/rollout, architecture decision, or spec artifact. Ask only the questions that matter.

2. Ground in evidence

Read relevant files and search the codebase before proposing changes. Be explicit about what's confirmed from code vs. inferred vs. unknown.

3. Choose the right altitude

  • Small change → concise plan with touchpoints and validation
  • Multi-file feature → phased plan with dependencies
  • Architecture choice → options, tradeoffs, recommendation
  • Migration / rollout → sequencing, rollback, validation checkpoints

Don't force every request into the same template.

4. Write the plan (right-size the artifact)

Match artifact to plan size — don't force plans/*.md on small scoped changes.

  • Inline prose — small single-file tweaks, quick scoped edits, brief decisions. Present the plan in the response and stop.
  • plans/YYYYMMDDHHMMSS-{plan-name}.md — multi-file features, migrations, architecture decisions, anything that benefits from review or history.
  • plans/YYYYMMDDHHMMSS-{plan-name}/plan.md + phase files — large multi-phase work where each phase warrants independent reading/editing.

Use date +%Y%m%d%H%M%S for timestamps.

A strong plan covers: problem summary, recommended approach, phases/workstreams, affected files/modules/systems, dependencies and sequencing, validation strategy, risks and mitigations, assumptions and open questions, non-goals when useful.

5. Present and stop

Summarize the recommendation, call out risks/assumptions/unknowns, clarify what needs user confirmation, then wait. Do not drift into coding.

Boundaries

  • Prose, not code — describe *what* changes in prose (name the file, the concept); never include executable syntax (function bodies, JSX, SQL, migration scripts, shell commands). "Illustrative" snippets are still implementation code.
  • Right-sized artifacts — don't force heavyweight structure onto small work; don't leave plans so abstract they name no touchpoints or validation path.
  • Every plan needs a validation path — how will you know the implementation succeeded?
  • Name concrete files, interfaces, and systems where possible. Surface tradeoffs instead of hiding them.

Request

<request>$ARGUMENTS</request>

Other skills for the same job

different authors, same section of the catalogue
Doc Coauthoring
by anthropics
vendor ×10

Guide users through a structured workflow for co-authoring documentation. Use when user wants to write documentation, proposals, technical specs, decision docs, or similar structured content. This workflow helps users efficiently transfer context, refine content through iteration, and verify the doc works for readers. Trigger when user mentions writing docs, creating proposals, drafting specs, or similar documentation tasks.

4k tokens
Peer Review
by christophacham
×1

Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.

13k tokens
Agile Product Owner
by ComeOnOliver
×1

Agile product ownership toolkit for Senior Product Owner including INVEST-compliant user story generation, sprint planning, backlog management, and velocity tracking. Use for story writing, sprint planning, stakeholder communication, and agile ceremonies.

9k tokens scripts
Claude Hook Writer
by ComeOnOliver
×1

Expert guidance for writing secure, reliable, and performant Claude Code hooks - validates design decisions, enforces best practices, and prevents common pitfalls. Use when creating, reviewing, or debugging Claude Code hooks.

12k tokens
Brainstorming
by ComeOnOliver
×1

Use when creating or developing anything, before writing code or implementation plans - refines rough ideas into fully-formed designs through structured Socratic questioning, alternative exploration, and incremental validation

5k tokens
Peer Review
by ComeOnOliver
×1

Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.

17k tokens
Feature Forge
by Jeffallan

Conducts structured requirements workshops to produce feature specifications, user stories, EARS-format functional requirements, acceptance criteria, and implementation checklists. Use when defining new features, gathering requirements, or writing specifications. Invoke for feature definition, requirements gathering, user stories, EARS format specs, PRDs, acceptance criteria, or requirement matrices.

5k tokens
Markdown Drafts
by cloudflare
vendor

Use markdown formatting when drafting content intended for external systems (GitHub issues/PRs, Jira tickets, wiki pages, design docs, etc.) so formatting is preserved when the user copies it. Load this skill before producing any draft the user will paste elsewhere.

889 tokens

How to use it

Copy the folder

Take avibebuilder/give-plan from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.

Check the name does not clash

The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.