vamfi/claude-user-memory/planning-methodology
Claude Code and agent skill by vamfi/claude-user-memory
- community
Checking that the SKILL.md file is still in the repository.
Systematic approach for creating minimal-change, reversible implementation plans. Claude invokes this skill when transforming requirements/research into executable blueprints. Emphasizes simplicity, safety, and clear verification steps.
Install
npx vskill@latest install vamfi/claude-user-memory/planning-methodologySKILL.md
Planning Methodology Skill
This skill provides a systematic methodology for creating implementation plans that are surgical, reversible, and minimize risk while maximizing clarity.
When Claude Should Use This Skill
Claude will automatically invoke this skill when:
- ResearchPack is ready and implementation planning is needed
- User asks "how should we implement...", "create a plan for..."
- Complex feature requires structured approach
- Need to break down requirements into executable steps
- Transforming research into actionable blueprint
Core Principles (BRAHMA Constitution)
- Simplicity over complexity (KISS, YAGNI)
- Minimal changes only - Touch fewest files possible
- Reversibility mandatory - Every change must be undoable
- Verification at each step - Clear success criteria
Planning Methodology Protocol
Step 1: Codebase Discovery (< 90 seconds)
Objective: Understand existing structure before planning changes
Actions:
- Structure scan (use Glob tool):
``` Search patterns:
- Source files: src/**/*.{ext}
- Config files: *.config.{ext}, .{ext}rc
- Test files: /*.test.{ext}, /*.spec.{ext}
- Documentation: docs/*.md, README.md
```
- Pattern recognition (use Grep + Read):
- How similar features are currently implemented
- Naming conventions (file names, function names)
- Code style (indentation, formatting)
- Import/export patterns
- Test patterns and frameworks
- Integration point identification:
- Where does new code connect to existing code?
- Configuration files that need updates
- Entry points (main.ts, index.js, etc.)
- Dependency injection patterns
- Constraint discovery:
- Existing dependencies that limit choices
- Framework conventions that must be followed
- Security/auth patterns that must be maintained
- Performance SLAs to meet
Output:
Anti-stagnation: Max 90 seconds - if codebase is large, focus on areas relevant to feature only
Step 2: Minimal Change Analysis (< 60 seconds)
Objective: Identify the smallest set of changes that accomplishes the goal
Questions to answer:
- New vs Modify:
- Can we extend existing code (better) or must we modify it?
- Can new functionality live in new files (preferred)?
- What's the smallest interface between new and existing code?
- Reuse vs Rebuild:
- What existing utilities/services can be reused?
- What patterns can we follow from similar features?
- What must be built from scratch (minimize this)?
- Scope boundaries:
- What's the absolute minimum to make feature work?
- What's "nice to have" that can be deferred?
- What edge cases must be handled vs can be documented as limitations?
- Reversibility:
- How easily can each change be undone?
- Are we modifying core/critical files (higher risk)?
- Can we use feature flags for gradual rollout?
Output:
Principles:
- Prefer extension over modification
- Prefer new files over editing existing
- Prefer configuration over code
- Prefer composition over inheritance
Step 3: Risk Assessment (< 30 seconds)
Objective: Identify what could go wrong and plan mitigations
Categories of risk:
- Breaking changes:
- Will this affect existing functionality?
- Are we modifying shared/core modules?
- Could this break other features?
- Performance risks:
- Will this add latency to critical paths?
- Memory/CPU impact on existing operations?
- Database query performance degradation?
- Security risks:
- Does this handle user input (validate & sanitize)?
- Are credentials/secrets managed properly?
- Could this introduce injection vulnerabilities?
- Integration risks:
- Dependencies on external services (what if they're down)?
- API version mismatches?
- Race conditions or concurrency issues?
- Testing gaps:
- What's hard to unit test (integration test instead)?
- What scenarios might we miss?
- What's the fallback if tests don't catch an issue?
For each identified risk:
Anti-pattern: Don't identify risks without mitigations - every risk needs an answer
Step 4: Implementation Sequence (< 30 seconds)
Objective: Order the work for safety and clarity
Sequencing principles:
- Dependencies first: Build foundation before dependent features
- Tests alongside: Write tests as you implement (or before - TDD)
- Incremental integration: Connect to existing system gradually
- Verification checkpoints: Each step has clear pass/fail criteria
Step structure:
Verification methods:
- Unit test passes:
npm test path/to/test - Build succeeds:
npm run build - Manual check: "Navigate to X and confirm Y is visible"
- Integration test:
npm run test:integration - Performance check:
npm run benchmark(if applicable)
Total time estimate: Sum of all step estimates + 20% buffer
Step 5: Rollback Planning (< 20 seconds)
Objective: Ensure every change can be undone safely
Rollback mechanisms (in priority order):
- Git revert (simplest):
``bash git reset --hard [checkpoint-commit] `` Good when: All changes in one commit, no DB migrations
- Feature flag toggle (gradual rollout):
``javascript if (featureFlags.newFeature === true) { // new code } else { // old code } `` Good when: Want to test in production, quick rollback needed
- Configuration rollback:
Restore previous config files Good when: Changes are mostly configuration-driven
- Partial rollback:
Keep working parts, revert broken parts Good when: Multiple independent changes, some work
Rollback plan must include:
- Exact commands to execute
- Verification steps after rollback
- Data migration rollback (if DB changes made)
- Cache invalidation (if caching involved)
Rollback triggers (when to execute rollback):
- Tests fail in production
- Performance degrades > [threshold]%
- Error rate increases > [threshold]%
- Critical functionality breaks
Step 6: Plan Documentation (< 30 seconds)
Objective: Structure all above findings into clear, executable plan
Implementation Plan Format:
Checklist before delivering:
- β Every file change has a clear purpose
- β Every step has verification method
- β All risks have mitigations
- β Rollback plan is complete and tested (if possible)
- β Success criteria are measurable
- β Time estimates are realistic
Quality Standards
Completeness
- File changes: Specify exact files with line-level changes where possible
- Steps: Each step is atomic (can be done and verified independently)
- Tests: Cover happy path + at least 2 edge cases + 1 error case
- Risks: All major risks identified (breaking, performance, security)
Clarity
- Actionable: Developer can execute without additional questions
- Verifiable: Each step has objective pass/fail criteria
- Unambiguous: No "probably" or "maybe" - specific instructions only
Safety
- Reversible: Every change can be undone
- Incremental: Changes build up gradually (not big bang)
- Validated: Tests verify correctness at each step
- Isolated: Failure of one step doesn't break entire system
Common Pitfalls to Avoid
β Don't:
- Plan modifications to many files simultaneously (hard to verify)
- Skip risk assessment ("hope for the best")
- Forget rollback plan
- Make plans that require perfect execution (allow for errors)
- Over-engineer ("we might need this someday")
- Under-estimate time (plans should be realistic)
β Do:
- Touch fewest files possible (minimal blast radius)
- Identify risks and plan mitigations explicitly
- Always include rollback procedure
- Build in verification checkpoints at every step
- Follow YAGNI (You Aren't Gonna Need It) - only what's needed now
- Add 20% time buffer for unexpected issues
Integration with knowledge-core.md
Before planning: Read knowledge-core.md to check for:
- Architectural patterns established in past projects
- Decisions that constrain current work
- Known gotchas in this codebase
After planning: If plan establishes new patterns, note for knowledge-core update:
Performance Targets
- Total planning time: < 3 minutes for typical features
- Plan accuracy: 95%+ of files identified correctly
- Risk coverage: 100% of major risks identified
- Time estimates: Within 30% of actual implementation time
Example Usage
Scenario: ResearchPack ready for Redis caching, need implementation plan
Claude (using this skill):
This skill ensures plans are safe, minimal, clear, and executable - setting up @code-implementer for success.
Security
- Security scanPassed, 100 of 100Pattern checks on the skill's files.
- Model reviewNot runA model review is scheduled for the next rescan.
Quality evaluation
- Task evaluationNot runNo evaluation yet. Run one in Skill Studio.
Source
- SKILL.md in the repositoryCheckingarchive/2026-09-26-install-md-migration/legacy/.claude/skills/planning-methodology/skill.md
Popularity
- Repository stars
- 212
- Repository forks
- 32
- 7-day trend score
- 32
Stars and forks are for the whole GitHub repository, not this skill alone. Not refreshed yet.
Works with
Any agent vskill installs to: 56 targets in all. These 39 have a page on this site.
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- GitHub Copilot
- Windsurf
- Codex
- Gemini CLI
- Cline
- Amp
- Roo Code
- Goose
- Continue
- Kilo Code
- Junie
- Trae
- OpenHands
- Qwen Code
- AI Agent
- Tabnine Chat
- Sourcegraph Cody
- Amazon Q
- Firebase Genkit
- Sweep
- Devin
- Phind
- Mentat
- Claude Desktop
- Aider
- GPT Pilot
- Plandex
- bolt.new
- v0
- Replit Agent
- Anse
- TypingMind
- BetterChatGPT
- LibreChat
- Warp AI
- Pieces
- Fig AI
Embed badge
[](https://verified-skill.com/skills/vamfi/claude-user-memory/planning-methodology)