[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M7AR4BFMSVCM1CSB9495NTKN":3,"skill-same:01M7AR4BFMSVCM1CSB9495NTKN":54},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":16,"categories":17,"keywords":18,"publishedAt":19,"linkOnly":20,"markdownContent":21,"markdownBody":22,"frontMatter":23,"refName":24,"commitSha":25,"skillDirectory":26,"forksCount":14,"repositoryHtmlUrl":27,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":28,"ownerBlogUrl":6,"ownerDescription":6,"updatedAt":29,"install":30,"resources":43},"01M7AR4BFMSVCM1CSB9495NTKN","writing-plans",null,"Use when you have an approved spec or written requirements for a multi-step task that needs a durable plan document before touching code. Small, single-owner, or fast-path tasks do not need this skill.","ham-zax\u002Fwebharness","ham-zax","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F81289670?v=4","01M7AQGHAV4TPYCAZY23S7SVSC","Ahmed Hamza","01M7AQGHBCFJYE7KWZ34W9HEGH",0,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fham-zax\u002Fwebharness\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskill-library\u002Fpacks\u002Factive\u002Fwriting-plans\u002FSKILL.md",[],[],"2026-11-15 14:19:17",false,"---\nname: writing-plans\ndescription: \"Use when you have an approved spec or written requirements for a multi-step task that needs a durable plan document before touching code. Small, single-owner, or fast-path tasks do not need this skill.\"\n---\n\n\u003CEXPLICIT-MODE-GATE>\nIf activation mode is explicit (`~\u002F.config\u002Faegis\u002Fconfig.toml` has\n`activation_mode = \"explicit\"`, or `AEGIS_ACTIVATION_MODE=explicit` is visible\nin the environment) and the current user request did not explicitly invoke\nAegis or this skill by name, exit back to the fast path: answer concisely\nwithout this workflow's checklist, ceremony, or document requirements. If the\nuser explicitly named Aegis or this skill, proceed normally.\n\u003C\u002FEXPLICIT-MODE-GATE>\n\n# Execute\n\n→ Existing parent plan\u002Fspec and a tiny execution slice? → **Use Planless Slice Lane.**\n→ Mechanical or bounded change with no durable boundary (no new owner,\n  contract, schema, public API, migration, or compat surface)? → **Use\n  Planless Slice Lane without a parent document.**\n→ Approved spec\u002Frequirements for a new workstream or an escalation trigger? →\n  **Write an implementation plan for an engineer with no prior task context.**\n\nFor a durable plan: confirm scope and acceptance, map current owners\u002Ffiles,\nrecord the TDD route, decompose into executable tasks, define verification and\nretirement, self-review, save, then select the execution route. Proceed unless\na real authorization or safety boundary requires the user.\n\nBind tasks to the requested user outcomes: object, actions, conditions, and\ndeliverables. Include the final delivery step and evidence at the user-visible\nseam, not only implementation\u002Ftests. Keep unmet needs and dependencies explicit;\nproject-wide goals do not authorize work outside this request. Reuse the\nexisting scope\u002Facceptance slots; no extra goal artifact is required.\n\nEscalate from Planless Slice Lane when the work adds a new owner, contract,\nschema, public API, architecture boundary, migration, persistence,\nsecurity\u002Fpermission, distribution\u002Frelease surface, or an unclear verification\nboundary.\n\n# Writing Plans\n\nThis skill turns approved requirements into a bounded, executable plan. The\nplan must answer: what changes, why code is necessary, which existing owner and\nfiles change, what stays compatible, what verifies the result, what risk\nremains, and what old path is retired or deliberately retained. A plan is\nmethod-pack guidance; it cannot grant authoritative completion.\n\n## TDD Route Guard\n\nBefore task decomposition, record `TDD Route` with mode (`off | auto`), decision\n(`strict | light | skipped`), authority, test posture, reason, and verification.\n\nStrict RED \u002F GREEN steps belong only to an explicit user\u002Fproject TDD request or\n`TDD Route: strict`. In `off`, use `skipped` unless explicit strict authority\noverrides it. An approved plan or a risk label alone is not strict authority.\n\nIn `auto`, select `strict` for behavior, bugfix, shared\u002Fcore, contract,\npersistence, permission, migration, producer\u002Fconsumer, or meaningful\nregression signals. Select `light` only when the work is tiny, low-risk,\nsingle-owner, has no behavior change or strict signal, and has an obvious\nfocused check. Absence of an explicit user TDD request is never evidence for\n`light`; the auto decision itself must be recorded.\n\nIf risk remains unknown, return to requirements, debugging, or plan review\nbefore task decomposition; do not infer a TDD route from uncertainty.\n\nOnly a `strict` decision with stated authority may prescribe failing-test,\nRED, GREEN, and REFACTOR steps. Otherwise plan the minimum change plus\ndiagnostic reproduction or post-change regression. A missing auto decision\nreturns to route selection before implementation tasks.\n\n## Entry And Artifact Choice\n\n**Announce at start:** on the plan-writing route, say that this skill is\ncreating the implementation plan. On `Planless Slice Lane`, announce the lane instead and do not claim a plan is being created.\n\n**Execution context:** Reuse the current branch\u002Fworkspace by default. A branch\nneeds independent history; a worktree needs concurrent checkout, blocking\nunrelated dirty state, or explicit user\u002Frepository authority.\n\n**Input:** approved requirements, a Spec Brief, or a Design Spec.\n\n**Default plan path:** `docs\u002Faegis\u002Fplans\u002FYYYY-MM-DD-\u003Cfeature-name>.md`. Plans do\nnot go in `work\u002F`; user and repository authority override the default.\n\nException: use `Planless Slice Lane` when an existing parent plan\u002Fspec already\nowns the current tiny execution slice, or when the change is mechanical or\nbounded and needs no parent document. Do not save a new plan. Emit a compact\n`Slice Card`:\n\n```text\nSlice Card:\n- Goal:\n- Parent plan\u002Fspec:\n- Files:\n- Boundary:\n- Verification:\n- Stop:\n```\n\nOn the no-parent branch, `Parent plan\u002Fspec:` is `none — direct bounded request`.\n\n## Aegis Project Workspace\n\nWorkspace creation is lazy and follows project authority. The Aegis Method\nPack repository must not create or ship a live `docs\u002Faegis\u002F` workspace. When a\ndurable plan must initialize or update another project's workspace, read the\nworkspace section of `expanded-planning-guidance.md`. It owns the\n`\u003Caegis-workspace-helper>` and `INDEX.md` command detail, not the decision to\ncreate a plan.\n\n## Default Plan Surface\n\nCompact output contract: express these as natural plan content, not a stack of\ncards: `Aegis Visibility`, approved scope and plan basis, required baseline\nrefs, files\u002Fowners, compatibility boundary, `Change Necessity`, TDD route,\ntasks, verification, risks, and retirement. Keep conditional structures silent unless their trigger below fires.\n\n`Aegis Visibility` is normally one sentence explaining which owner, contract,\nretirement, compatibility, or verification pressure makes a durable plan\nuseful. Structured trace belongs only to audit, debug, release, long-task\nreview, or explicit request.\n\nBefore tasks, perform a `Requirement Ready Check`: identify the approved source,\nscope, scenarios, and acceptance evidence. If any decision-changing item is\nmissing, do not create implementation tasks; return the smallest gap to the\nrequirement\u002Fspec owner.\n\nPerform `Change Necessity` before any non-trivial source edit or any new source-code path. This is behavior-triggered, not prompt-triggered. State\nnaturally why no-change\u002Fdocs\u002Fconfig is insufficient and name the minimum code\nboundary. A tiny helper, guard, branch, fallback, adapter, or owner is not\nexempt. A `no-change`, `docs\u002Fconfig-only`, or `needs-clarification` result\nnarrows or stops the code plan.\n\nRun `Ripple Signal Triage` before tasks when the change touches shared\u002Fcore or\ncross-module behavior; a public API, schema, contract, compatibility,\npersistence, cache, export\u002Freadback, fallback, adapter, duplicate\u002Flegacy owner,\nretirement path, or both producer and consumer. If no signal fires, add no\noutput. If one fires, identify the canonical owner and affected downstream consumers,\nstate source-of-truth\u002Fcontract\u002Ffallback\u002Fretirement risk, and carry expanded verification\ninto the relevant task. A required owner\u002Fpublic-contract\u002Fsource-of-truth change,\nretaining two owners, or adding a fallback, adapter, or compatibility branch\nreturns to design or requires explicit prior alignment before implementation.\n\nRun a compact `Plan Pressure Test` before task decomposition: test owner \u002F contract \u002F retirement fit, higher-level architecture path, verification scope,\nand task executability. It may proceed, revise the plan, or return to design;\nit is not an approval authority.\n\n## Conditional Detailed Guidance\n\nFor interface\u002Finteraction work, compose `ui-ux-governance` and carry the accepted\nexperience criteria and corresponding checks into affected tasks. Include API\nchanges that alter visible states or recovery; keep backend-only work scoped.\n\nRead only the trigger-matched section of `expanded-planning-guidance.md`:\n\n- `## Baseline And Requirement Detail` when specific baseline acknowledgement\n  needs structure or requirement readiness is incomplete\u002Fdisputed;\n- `## New-Surface And Architecture Detail` when a new surface or new owner needs\n  `Existence Check`, `AEGIS_MINIMALITY_REFERENCE`, `Architecture Integrity Lens`,\n  or `first-principles-review` detail before task decomposition;\n- `## Complexity Detail` when material file-size, mixed-owner, add-in-place,\n  adapter, fallback, or shared-core pressure appears;\n- `## Execution Readiness Detail` for a long-running, handoff-prone,\n  subagent-driven, high-risk architecture\u002Fcontract\u002Fcompatibility\u002Fretirement handoff;\n- `## Workspace Save Detail` only when saving requires workspace initialization\n  or `INDEX.md` updates;\n- `## Execution Route Detail` only when route evidence needs a structured\n  handoff; and\n- `## Expanded Plan Review` only for an independent high-risk or handoff-heavy\n  review.\n\nThe direct triggers cover baseline readiness, new surface or new owner,\ncomplexity pressure, workspace persistence, and execution handoff. The\nreference supplies detail only. This main file owns routing, plan versus\nPlanless selection, task blocking, and execution handoff.\n\nFor a new surface, use `Existence Check` and\n`docs\u002Fcurrent\u002FAEGIS_MINIMALITY_REFERENCE.md` before tasks. Reuse an existing\nowner when it is sufficient. If owner, contract, responsibility overlap,\nhigher-level simplification, fallback, or retirement remains risky, use the\n`Architecture Integrity Lens` and `first-principles-review` before task\ndecomposition.\n\nFor maintained source, screen file shape, owner fit, add-in-place risk, and a\nbetter boundary. With no pressure signal, a compact edit-in-place decision is\nenough. When pressure exists, load the expanded `Plan-Time Complexity Check`\nand `Complexity Budget`. An over-budget result must change the task boundary,\nadd governance work, or stop for follow-up.\n\nFor an ordinary medium\u002Fhigh handoff, state Intent Lock, Scope Fence, Baseline Lock, tests, and drift stop naturally. Load the expanded `Execution Readiness View` only for the auditable handoff triggers above. Neither form is a\n`GateDecision`, `PolicySnapshot`, approval gate, or completion authority.\n\nIf the plan must choose among deleting an old internal path, retaining a proven\nexternal compatibility boundary, or stopping for persistent-state\nconfirmation, compose `anti-entropy-governance`. It does not authorize\ndestructive execution.\n\nPreserve approved ADR signal preservation, source refs, alternatives,\ncompatibility, and baseline-sync questions for completion; do not create\naccepted architecture memory from an unexecuted plan.\n\n## Planless Slice Lane\n\nUse `Planless Slice Lane` before writing or saving a plan when one of these\nentry conditions holds:\n\n- a parent spec or parent plan already defines the workstream, and the current\n  request is executing or refining one bounded task from that parent\n- the change is mechanical or bounded and needs no parent document (the\n  no-parent branch under `# Execute`)\n\nand both of these are true:\n\n- no new owner, contract, schema, public API, architecture boundary, migration,\n  persistence, security\u002Fpermission, distribution\u002Frelease surface, or unclear\n  verification boundary appears\n- the slice can be described by a `Slice Card`\n\nThe lane preserves long-task continuity without turning execution bookkeeping\ninto durable planning artifacts. A parent scope or acceptance mismatch returns\nto the parent plan\u002Fspec instead of spawning a micro-plan.\n\n## Plan And Task Quality\n\nMap files before tasks. Follow existing ownership and naming. For non-trivial\nplans, passively use relevant current terms from `CONTEXT-MAP.md` or `CONTEXT.md`;\nroute a real semantic conflict to `establishing-project-context`.\n\nEvery durable plan starts with Goal, Architecture, Tech Stack,\nBaseline\u002FAuthority Refs, Compatibility Boundary, TDD Route, and Verification.\nThen define small, ordered tasks with exact files, purpose, minimum necessary\nchange, compatibility impact, and commands\u002Foutcomes that prove the task.\nInclude code excerpts only when a signature, contract, or transformation would\notherwise remain ambiguous; do not duplicate the implementation inside the\nplan.\n\nFor bug fixes, refactors, contract changes, or governance cleanup, keep Repair\nTrack and Retirement Track explicit in the affected task. A retained old owner\nor fallback needs a reason and retirement trigger.\n\nSelf-review once for approved-scope coverage, placeholders, owner\u002Ftype\nconsistency, minimum change boundary, compatibility, exact verification,\nconditional trigger handling, and retirement. Fix defects inline. Tasks are\nexecution units, not Git history units: the coordinator captures\n`TaskStartSnapshot` and creates one scoped commit only after the whole Task is\nreviewed and freshly verified.\n\n## Execution Handoff\n\nThe agent owns the execution-route decision. Select `subagent-driven` only for\ngenuinely independent tasks with bounded ownership when coordination pays for\nit; otherwise select `inline`. Unavailable subagents falls back to inline execution. A dirty workspace alone does not select either route.\n\nAsk the user only for unresolved authorization, privacy, paid-resource,\nexternal-action, irreversible-action, scope, acceptance, or workspace-ownership\nboundaries. Otherwise proceed immediately. State the decision, evidence,\nfallback, and `User confirmation required: no | yes — \u003Cboundary>` compactly;\nload the reference only when the full `Execution Route` schema is useful.\n\nFor `subagent-driven`, use `aegis:subagent-driven-development`. For `inline`,\nuse `aegis:executing-plans`.\n","\u003CEXPLICIT-MODE-GATE>\nIf activation mode is explicit (`~\u002F.config\u002Faegis\u002Fconfig.toml` has\n`activation_mode = \"explicit\"`, or `AEGIS_ACTIVATION_MODE=explicit` is visible\nin the environment) and the current user request did not explicitly invoke\nAegis or this skill by name, exit back to the fast path: answer concisely\nwithout this workflow's checklist, ceremony, or document requirements. If the\nuser explicitly named Aegis or this skill, proceed normally.\n\u003C\u002FEXPLICIT-MODE-GATE>\n\n# Execute\n\n→ Existing parent plan\u002Fspec and a tiny execution slice? → **Use Planless Slice Lane.**\n→ Mechanical or bounded change with no durable boundary (no new owner,\n  contract, schema, public API, migration, or compat surface)? → **Use\n  Planless Slice Lane without a parent document.**\n→ Approved spec\u002Frequirements for a new workstream or an escalation trigger? →\n  **Write an implementation plan for an engineer with no prior task context.**\n\nFor a durable plan: confirm scope and acceptance, map current owners\u002Ffiles,\nrecord the TDD route, decompose into executable tasks, define verification and\nretirement, self-review, save, then select the execution route. Proceed unless\na real authorization or safety boundary requires the user.\n\nBind tasks to the requested user outcomes: object, actions, conditions, and\ndeliverables. Include the final delivery step and evidence at the user-visible\nseam, not only implementation\u002Ftests. Keep unmet needs and dependencies explicit;\nproject-wide goals do not authorize work outside this request. Reuse the\nexisting scope\u002Facceptance slots; no extra goal artifact is required.\n\nEscalate from Planless Slice Lane when the work adds a new owner, contract,\nschema, public API, architecture boundary, migration, persistence,\nsecurity\u002Fpermission, distribution\u002Frelease surface, or an unclear verification\nboundary.\n\n# Writing Plans\n\nThis skill turns approved requirements into a bounded, executable plan. The\nplan must answer: what changes, why code is necessary, which existing owner and\nfiles change, what stays compatible, what verifies the result, what risk\nremains, and what old path is retired or deliberately retained. A plan is\nmethod-pack guidance; it cannot grant authoritative completion.\n\n## TDD Route Guard\n\nBefore task decomposition, record `TDD Route` with mode (`off | auto`), decision\n(`strict | light | skipped`), authority, test posture, reason, and verification.\n\nStrict RED \u002F GREEN steps belong only to an explicit user\u002Fproject TDD request or\n`TDD Route: strict`. In `off`, use `skipped` unless explicit strict authority\noverrides it. An approved plan or a risk label alone is not strict authority.\n\nIn `auto`, select `strict` for behavior, bugfix, shared\u002Fcore, contract,\npersistence, permission, migration, producer\u002Fconsumer, or meaningful\nregression signals. Select `light` only when the work is tiny, low-risk,\nsingle-owner, has no behavior change or strict signal, and has an obvious\nfocused check. Absence of an explicit user TDD request is never evidence for\n`light`; the auto decision itself must be recorded.\n\nIf risk remains unknown, return to requirements, debugging, or plan review\nbefore task decomposition; do not infer a TDD route from uncertainty.\n\nOnly a `strict` decision with stated authority may prescribe failing-test,\nRED, GREEN, and REFACTOR steps. Otherwise plan the minimum change plus\ndiagnostic reproduction or post-change regression. A missing auto decision\nreturns to route selection before implementation tasks.\n\n## Entry And Artifact Choice\n\n**Announce at start:** on the plan-writing route, say that this skill is\ncreating the implementation plan. On `Planless Slice Lane`, announce the lane instead and do not claim a plan is being created.\n\n**Execution context:** Reuse the current branch\u002Fworkspace by default. A branch\nneeds independent history; a worktree needs concurrent checkout, blocking\nunrelated dirty state, or explicit user\u002Frepository authority.\n\n**Input:** approved requirements, a Spec Brief, or a Design Spec.\n\n**Default plan path:** `docs\u002Faegis\u002Fplans\u002FYYYY-MM-DD-\u003Cfeature-name>.md`. Plans do\nnot go in `work\u002F`; user and repository authority override the default.\n\nException: use `Planless Slice Lane` when an existing parent plan\u002Fspec already\nowns the current tiny execution slice, or when the change is mechanical or\nbounded and needs no parent document. Do not save a new plan. Emit a compact\n`Slice Card`:\n\n```text\nSlice Card:\n- Goal:\n- Parent plan\u002Fspec:\n- Files:\n- Boundary:\n- Verification:\n- Stop:\n```\n\nOn the no-parent branch, `Parent plan\u002Fspec:` is `none — direct bounded request`.\n\n## Aegis Project Workspace\n\nWorkspace creation is lazy and follows project authority. The Aegis Method\nPack repository must not create or ship a live `docs\u002Faegis\u002F` workspace. When a\ndurable plan must initialize or update another project's workspace, read the\nworkspace section of `expanded-planning-guidance.md`. It owns the\n`\u003Caegis-workspace-helper>` and `INDEX.md` command detail, not the decision to\ncreate a plan.\n\n## Default Plan Surface\n\nCompact output contract: express these as natural plan content, not a stack of\ncards: `Aegis Visibility`, approved scope and plan basis, required baseline\nrefs, files\u002Fowners, compatibility boundary, `Change Necessity`, TDD route,\ntasks, verification, risks, and retirement. Keep conditional structures silent unless their trigger below fires.\n\n`Aegis Visibility` is normally one sentence explaining which owner, contract,\nretirement, compatibility, or verification pressure makes a durable plan\nuseful. Structured trace belongs only to audit, debug, release, long-task\nreview, or explicit request.\n\nBefore tasks, perform a `Requirement Ready Check`: identify the approved source,\nscope, scenarios, and acceptance evidence. If any decision-changing item is\nmissing, do not create implementation tasks; return the smallest gap to the\nrequirement\u002Fspec owner.\n\nPerform `Change Necessity` before any non-trivial source edit or any new source-code path. This is behavior-triggered, not prompt-triggered. State\nnaturally why no-change\u002Fdocs\u002Fconfig is insufficient and name the minimum code\nboundary. A tiny helper, guard, branch, fallback, adapter, or owner is not\nexempt. A `no-change`, `docs\u002Fconfig-only`, or `needs-clarification` result\nnarrows or stops the code plan.\n\nRun `Ripple Signal Triage` before tasks when the change touches shared\u002Fcore or\ncross-module behavior; a public API, schema, contract, compatibility,\npersistence, cache, export\u002Freadback, fallback, adapter, duplicate\u002Flegacy owner,\nretirement path, or both producer and consumer. If no signal fires, add no\noutput. If one fires, identify the canonical owner and affected downstream consumers,\nstate source-of-truth\u002Fcontract\u002Ffallback\u002Fretirement risk, and carry expanded verification\ninto the relevant task. A required owner\u002Fpublic-contract\u002Fsource-of-truth change,\nretaining two owners, or adding a fallback, adapter, or compatibility branch\nreturns to design or requires explicit prior alignment before implementation.\n\nRun a compact `Plan Pressure Test` before task decomposition: test owner \u002F contract \u002F retirement fit, higher-level architecture path, verification scope,\nand task executability. It may proceed, revise the plan, or return to design;\nit is not an approval authority.\n\n## Conditional Detailed Guidance\n\nFor interface\u002Finteraction work, compose `ui-ux-governance` and carry the accepted\nexperience criteria and corresponding checks into affected tasks. Include API\nchanges that alter visible states or recovery; keep backend-only work scoped.\n\nRead only the trigger-matched section of `expanded-planning-guidance.md`:\n\n- `## Baseline And Requirement Detail` when specific baseline acknowledgement\n  needs structure or requirement readiness is incomplete\u002Fdisputed;\n- `## New-Surface And Architecture Detail` when a new surface or new owner needs\n  `Existence Check`, `AEGIS_MINIMALITY_REFERENCE`, `Architecture Integrity Lens`,\n  or `first-principles-review` detail before task decomposition;\n- `## Complexity Detail` when material file-size, mixed-owner, add-in-place,\n  adapter, fallback, or shared-core pressure appears;\n- `## Execution Readiness Detail` for a long-running, handoff-prone,\n  subagent-driven, high-risk architecture\u002Fcontract\u002Fcompatibility\u002Fretirement handoff;\n- `## Workspace Save Detail` only when saving requires workspace initialization\n  or `INDEX.md` updates;\n- `## Execution Route Detail` only when route evidence needs a structured\n  handoff; and\n- `## Expanded Plan Review` only for an independent high-risk or handoff-heavy\n  review.\n\nThe direct triggers cover baseline readiness, new surface or new owner,\ncomplexity pressure, workspace persistence, and execution handoff. The\nreference supplies detail only. This main file owns routing, plan versus\nPlanless selection, task blocking, and execution handoff.\n\nFor a new surface, use `Existence Check` and\n`docs\u002Fcurrent\u002FAEGIS_MINIMALITY_REFERENCE.md` before tasks. Reuse an existing\nowner when it is sufficient. If owner, contract, responsibility overlap,\nhigher-level simplification, fallback, or retirement remains risky, use the\n`Architecture Integrity Lens` and `first-principles-review` before task\ndecomposition.\n\nFor maintained source, screen file shape, owner fit, add-in-place risk, and a\nbetter boundary. With no pressure signal, a compact edit-in-place decision is\nenough. When pressure exists, load the expanded `Plan-Time Complexity Check`\nand `Complexity Budget`. An over-budget result must change the task boundary,\nadd governance work, or stop for follow-up.\n\nFor an ordinary medium\u002Fhigh handoff, state Intent Lock, Scope Fence, Baseline Lock, tests, and drift stop naturally. Load the expanded `Execution Readiness View` only for the auditable handoff triggers above. Neither form is a\n`GateDecision`, `PolicySnapshot`, approval gate, or completion authority.\n\nIf the plan must choose among deleting an old internal path, retaining a proven\nexternal compatibility boundary, or stopping for persistent-state\nconfirmation, compose `anti-entropy-governance`. It does not authorize\ndestructive execution.\n\nPreserve approved ADR signal preservation, source refs, alternatives,\ncompatibility, and baseline-sync questions for completion; do not create\naccepted architecture memory from an unexecuted plan.\n\n## Planless Slice Lane\n\nUse `Planless Slice Lane` before writing or saving a plan when one of these\nentry conditions holds:\n\n- a parent spec or parent plan already defines the workstream, and the current\n  request is executing or refining one bounded task from that parent\n- the change is mechanical or bounded and needs no parent document (the\n  no-parent branch under `# Execute`)\n\nand both of these are true:\n\n- no new owner, contract, schema, public API, architecture boundary, migration,\n  persistence, security\u002Fpermission, distribution\u002Frelease surface, or unclear\n  verification boundary appears\n- the slice can be described by a `Slice Card`\n\nThe lane preserves long-task continuity without turning execution bookkeeping\ninto durable planning artifacts. A parent scope or acceptance mismatch returns\nto the parent plan\u002Fspec instead of spawning a micro-plan.\n\n## Plan And Task Quality\n\nMap files before tasks. Follow existing ownership and naming. For non-trivial\nplans, passively use relevant current terms from `CONTEXT-MAP.md` or `CONTEXT.md`;\nroute a real semantic conflict to `establishing-project-context`.\n\nEvery durable plan starts with Goal, Architecture, Tech Stack,\nBaseline\u002FAuthority Refs, Compatibility Boundary, TDD Route, and Verification.\nThen define small, ordered tasks with exact files, purpose, minimum necessary\nchange, compatibility impact, and commands\u002Foutcomes that prove the task.\nInclude code excerpts only when a signature, contract, or transformation would\notherwise remain ambiguous; do not duplicate the implementation inside the\nplan.\n\nFor bug fixes, refactors, contract changes, or governance cleanup, keep Repair\nTrack and Retirement Track explicit in the affected task. A retained old owner\nor fallback needs a reason and retirement trigger.\n\nSelf-review once for approved-scope coverage, placeholders, owner\u002Ftype\nconsistency, minimum change boundary, compatibility, exact verification,\nconditional trigger handling, and retirement. Fix defects inline. Tasks are\nexecution units, not Git history units: the coordinator captures\n`TaskStartSnapshot` and creates one scoped commit only after the whole Task is\nreviewed and freshly verified.\n\n## Execution Handoff\n\nThe agent owns the execution-route decision. Select `subagent-driven` only for\ngenuinely independent tasks with bounded ownership when coordination pays for\nit; otherwise select `inline`. Unavailable subagents falls back to inline execution. A dirty workspace alone does not select either route.\n\nAsk the user only for unresolved authorization, privacy, paid-resource,\nexternal-action, irreversible-action, scope, acceptance, or workspace-ownership\nboundaries. Otherwise proceed immediately. State the decision, evidence,\nfallback, and `User confirmation required: no | yes — \u003Cboundary>` compactly;\nload the reference only when the full `Execution Route` schema is useful.\n\nFor `subagent-driven`, use `aegis:subagent-driven-development`. For `inline`,\nuse `aegis:executing-plans`.\n",{"name":5,"description":7},"main","59ee67804bc373a9bd079a3a27f47277a6efe564","skill-library\u002Fpacks\u002Factive\u002Fwriting-plans","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fham-zax\u002Fwebharness","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fham-zax","2026-11-15 01:18:51",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":31,"prompt":41,"zipAvailable":42},[32,35,38],{"tool":33,"command":34},"npx","npx skills add ham-zax\u002Fwebharness --skill writing-plans",{"tool":36,"command":37},"bunx","bunx skills add ham-zax\u002Fwebharness --skill writing-plans",{"tool":39,"command":40},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add ham-zax\u002Fwebharness --skill writing-plans","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fham-zax\u002Fwebharness\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskill-library\u002Fpacks\u002Factive\u002Fwriting-plans\u002FSKILL.md",true,[44,50],{"path":45,"resourceType":46,"resourceTypeDesc":47,"sizeBytes":48,"sourceHtmlUrl":49},"expanded-planning-guidance.md","REFERENCE","参考文档",6855,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fham-zax\u002Fwebharness\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskill-library\u002Fpacks\u002Factive\u002Fwriting-plans\u002Fexpanded-planning-guidance.md",{"path":51,"resourceType":46,"resourceTypeDesc":47,"sizeBytes":52,"sourceHtmlUrl":53},"plan-document-reviewer-prompt.md",1714,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fham-zax\u002Fwebharness\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskill-library\u002Fpacks\u002Factive\u002Fwriting-plans\u002Fplan-document-reviewer-prompt.md",[55,62,68,75,84,91],{"skillNo":56,"name":57,"nameZh":6,"description":58,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":59,"categories":60,"keywords":61,"publishedAt":19},"01M7AS6BAQQ2WQJYS3WBNJPB2G","x-content","Create, rewrite, critique, select formats for, discover opportunities for, and learn from X\u002FTwitter content and X Articles for a technical AI-native developer\u002Fbuilder account. Use when turning ideas, source posts, releases, benchmarks, results, conversations, authenticated For You or creator-watch opportunities, or project evidence into an Original, Quote, Thread, Reply, or Article; reviewing article titles\u002Foutlines\u002Fvisual briefs\u002Flaunch hooks; improving drafts; choosing additive contributions from live X context; or learning from own-account outcomes. Own content intelligence only; compose with agent-browser for live X state and Growth OS for discovery provenance, approvals, measurement, and publication.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fham-zax\u002Fwebharness\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fx-content\u002FSKILL.md",[],[],{"skillNo":63,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":64,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":65,"categories":66,"keywords":67,"publishedAt":19},"01M7AS66FXQR8FEQYW8G8RJB2N","Create detailed implementation plans for multi-step software work before editing code. Use when requirements or a specification must become concrete file-level tasks, interfaces, acceptance criteria, risks, rollout, or explicitly required validation. Default to no test creation, test modification, test execution, TDD, regression-test, or coverage work unless the user, authoritative specification, or mandatory repository policy explicitly requires testing.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fham-zax\u002Fwebharness\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fwriting-plans\u002FSKILL.md",[],[],{"skillNo":69,"name":70,"nameZh":6,"description":71,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":72,"categories":73,"keywords":74,"publishedAt":19},"01M7AS5ZCJX21NF2RESA2QDWPP","systematic-debugging","Root-cause debugging for concrete technical failures including bugs, failing builds or tests, integration issues, performance regressions, and unexpected behavior. Use before proposing or implementing a repair when diagnosis is required. Reproduce the symptom, trace the responsible owner, maintain one leading causal hypothesis, and falsify it with the smallest direct evidence. Compose with Causal Coding for source mutation; testing is opt-in and requires independent authorization.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fham-zax\u002Fwebharness\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fsystematic-debugging\u002FSKILL.md",[],[],{"skillNo":76,"name":77,"nameZh":6,"description":78,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":79,"licenseFileUrl":80,"sourceHtmlUrl":81,"categories":82,"keywords":83,"publishedAt":19},"01M7AS548FQ63SAB9G0X81VPGJ","skill-creator","Guide for creating and updating high-quality skills by translating workflows, conventions, and reusable processes into well-structured skills. Includes context, use case examples and spec for skills. Use this skill whenever a user asks to create, update, edit, improve, package, or troubleshoot a skill, and also for conversational questions about skills in ChatGPT (e.g., \"What are skills?\", \"What can I use skills for?\", \"What are the best skill use cases for me?\", \"Where can I find my skills?\").","Apache-2.0","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fham-zax\u002Fwebharness\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fskill-creator\u002FLICENSE.txt","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fham-zax\u002Fwebharness\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fskill-creator\u002FSKILL.md",[],[],{"skillNo":85,"name":86,"nameZh":6,"description":87,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":88,"categories":89,"keywords":90,"publishedAt":19},"01M7AS4XD121Q85Y06EXRGYS4F","reflexion","Self-refinement, multi-perspective critique, verification, and durable lesson curation adapted from NeoLabHQ Reflexion. Use when the user asks to reflect, self-review, critique, double-check, verify and improve prior work, run a rigorous review, memorize lessons, or says \"then reflect\" after a coding, analysis, or writing task. Supports repository-aware evidence gathering and works without subagents or Claude hooks.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fham-zax\u002Fwebharness\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Freflexion\u002FSKILL.md",[],[],{"skillNo":92,"name":93,"nameZh":6,"description":94,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":95,"categories":96,"keywords":97,"publishedAt":19},"01M7AS4RN5TYMA4P6SK6K7NVSR","ponytail","Enforce Ponytail's lazy-senior-developer approach for coding, fixing, refactoring, design, dependency choices, and explicit Ponytail modes such as review, audit, debt, gain, and help. Prefer YAGNI, existing code, standard library, native platform features, existing dependencies, low reader load, and the smallest correct diff. For source mutation, keep Causal Coding authoritative for scope, testing authorization, verification cadence, and stopping. On connected WSL\u002FLinux targets, compose with MCP Harness Router and use `wsl-web-harness` for authoritative repository work.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fham-zax\u002Fwebharness\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fponytail\u002FSKILL.md",[],[]]