EasyPlatform plan-analysis
[Planning] Use when the user provides an implementation plan file and asks to analyze it, assess impact, update specifications, or verify planned changes. Triggers on keywords like "analyze plan", "implementation plan", "assess impact", "update spec from plan", "verify plan".
git clone https://github.com/duc01226/EasyPlatform
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/duc01226/EasyPlatform "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/.claude/skills/plan-analysis" ~/.claude/skills/duc01226-easyplatform-plan-analysis && rm -rf "$T"
.claude/skills/plan-analysis/SKILL.md<!-- SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset -->[IMPORTANT] Use
to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting — including tasks for each file read. This prevents context loss from long files. For simple tasks, AI MUST ATTENTION ask user whether to skip.TaskCreate
<!-- /SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset --> <!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention -->Critical Thinking Mindset — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination.
<!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention -->AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:
- Check downstream references before deleting. Deleting components causes documentation and code staleness cascades. Map all referencing files before removal.
- Verify AI-generated content against actual code. AI hallucinates APIs, class names, and method signatures. Always grep to confirm existence before documenting or referencing.
- Trace full dependency chain after edits. Changing a definition misses downstream variables and consumers derived from it. Always trace the full chain.
- Trace ALL code paths when verifying correctness. Confirming code exists is not confirming it executes. Always trace early exits, error branches, and conditional skips — not just happy path.
- When debugging, ask "whose responsibility?" before fixing. Trace whether bug is in caller (wrong data) or callee (wrong handling). Fix at responsible layer — never patch symptom site.
- Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing. Before changing any constant, limit, flag, or pattern: read comments, check git blame, examine surrounding code.
- Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. Changes touching multiple stacks require verifying EVERY output. One green check is not all green checks.
- Holistic-first debugging — resist nearest-attention trap. When investigating any failure, list EVERY precondition first (config, env vars, DB names, endpoints, DI registrations, data preconditions), then verify each against evidence before forming any code-layer hypothesis.
- Surgical changes — apply the diff test. Bug fix: every changed line must trace directly to the bug. Don't restyle or improve adjacent code. Enhancement task: implement improvements AND announce them explicitly.
- Surface ambiguity before coding — don't pick silently. If request has multiple interpretations, present each with effort estimate and ask. Never assume all-records, file-based, or more complex path.
Prerequisites:
<!-- SYNC:plan-quality --><!-- /SYNC:plan-quality -->Plan Quality — Every plan phase MUST ATTENTION include test specifications.
- Add
section with TC-{FEAT}-{NNN} IDs to every phase file## Test Specifications- Map every functional requirement to ≥1 TC (or explicit
with rationale)TBD- TC IDs follow
format — reference by ID, never embed full contentTC-{FEATURE}-{NNN}- Before any new workflow step: call
and re-read the phase fileTaskList- On context compaction: call
FIRST — never create duplicate tasksTaskList- Verify TC satisfaction per phase before marking complete (evidence must be
, not TBD)file:lineMode: TDD-first → reference existing TCs with
. Implement-first → use TBD →Evidence: TBDfills after./tdd-spec
— Test specifications by module (read existing TCs to include test strategy in plan)docs/test-specs/
<!-- /SYNC:iterative-phase-quality -->Iterative Phase Quality — Score complexity BEFORE planning.
Complexity signals: >5 files +2, cross-service +3, new pattern +2, DB migration +2 Score >=6 → MUST ATTENTION decompose into phases. Each phase:
- ≤5 files modified
- ≤3h effort
- Follows cycle: plan → implement → review → fix → verify
- Do NOT start Phase N+1 until Phase N passes VERIFY
Phase success = all TCs pass + code-reviewer agent approves + no CRITICAL findings.
Quick Summary
Goal: Analyze an implementation plan, assess its impact on the codebase, and update specification documents accordingly.
Workflow:
- Discovery — Parse plan, extract requirements, catalog planned changes
- Knowledge Graph — Build detailed component-level impact map with test/spec mappings
- Analysis — Assess architecture impact, business logic changes, testing strategy
- Approval Gate — Present findings for explicit user approval before any spec updates
- Spec Update — Execute approved changes to specification documents
Key Rules:
- Planning-only skill -- never implement code changes
- Always collaborate and get user approval before proceeding
- Maintain bidirectional traceability between plan and specification
Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).
Implementation Plan Analysis & Specification Update
PLANNING-ONLY — Collaboration Required
DO NOT use the
tool — you are ALREADY in a planning workflow. DO NOT implement or execute any code changes. COLLABORATE with the user: ask decision questions, present options with recommendations. After plan analysis, validate findings with user approval. ASK user to confirm the analysis before any next steps.EnterPlanMode
You are to operate as an expert full-stack dotnet angular principle developer, software architect, and technical analyst to analyze a detailed implementation plan, perform comprehensive impact analysis, and update specification documents.
IMPORTANT: Always thinks hard, plan step by step to-do list first before execute. Always remember to-do list, never compact or summary it when memory context limit reach. Always preserve and carry your to-do list through every operation.
Prerequisites:
<!-- SYNC:understand-code-first --><!-- /SYNC:understand-code-first --> <!-- SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning -->Understand Code First — HARD-GATE: Do NOT write, plan, or fix until you READ existing code.
- Search 3+ similar patterns (
/grep) — citeglobevidencefile:line- Read existing files in target area — understand structure, base classes, conventions
- Run
whenpython .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file> --direction both --jsonexists.code-graph/graph.db- Map dependencies via
orconnections— know what depends on your targetcallers_of- Write investigation to
for non-trivial tasks (3+ files).ai/workspace/analysis/- Re-read analysis file before implementing — never work from memory alone
- NEVER invent new patterns when existing ones work — match exactly or document deviation
BLOCKED until:
Read target files- [ ]Grep 3+ patterns- [ ]Graph trace (if graph.db exists)- [ ]Assumptions verified with evidence- [ ]
<!-- /SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning -->Evidence-Based Reasoning — Speculation is FORBIDDEN. Every claim needs proof.
- Cite
, grep results, or framework docs for EVERY claimfile:line- Declare confidence: >80% act freely, 60-80% verify first, <60% DO NOT recommend
- Cross-service validation required for architectural changes
- "I don't have enough evidence" is valid and expected output
BLOCKED until:
Evidence file path (- [ ])file:lineGrep search performed- [ ]3+ similar patterns found- [ ]Confidence level stated- [ ]Forbidden without proof: "obviously", "I think", "should be", "probably", "this is because" If incomplete → output:
"Insufficient evidence. Verified: [...]. Not verified: [...]."
PHASE 1: EXTERNAL MEMORY-DRIVEN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ANALYSIS
Build a structured knowledge model in
.ai/workspace/analysis/[plan-name].analysis.md.
PHASE 1A: INITIALIZATION AND DISCOVERY
- Initialize the analysis file with standard headings
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS
IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN_DEEP_ANALYSIS: Thorough analysis of the implementation plan file:
-
Plan Structure Analysis:
- Read and parse the implementation plan completely
- Extract all planned features, requirements, and changes
- Identify implementation phases and dependencies
- Document under
## Implementation Plan Overview
-
Requirements Extraction:
- Parse Knowledge Graph from implementation plan
- Extract new business requirements
- Map functional and non-functional requirements
- Identify changed business workflows
- Document under
## Extracted Requirements
-
Planned Changes Analysis:
- Catalog all planned code changes (new files, modifications, deletions)
- Identify affected components, services, and layers
- Map file-level changes to business capabilities
- Extract integration points
- Document under
## Planned Changes Analysis
-
Architecture Impact Assessment:
- Analyze how changes affect overall system architecture
- Identify CQRS pattern impacts (new Commands/Queries/Events)
- Map domain entity changes and repository patterns
- Document under
## Architecture Impact Assessment
-
Existing Specification Analysis:
- Read and analyze existing specification document structure
- Identify current test cases, requirements, entity relationships
- Map existing test coverage to planned changes
- Document under
## Current Specification Analysis
AFFECTED_COMPONENTS_DISCOVERY: For each planned change, discover:
- Direct Dependencies
- Indirect Dependencies
- Test Coverage Impact
- API Integration Impact
- Cross-Service Communication
- Database Schema Impact
Save to
## Comprehensive File List with:
,filePath
,changeType
,relationshipTypeimpactLevel
,serviceContext
,planContextspecificationRelevance
PHASE 1B: KNOWLEDGE GRAPH CONSTRUCTION
IMPORTANT: MUST ATTENTION DO WITH TODO LIST
For each file, document in
## Knowledge Graph:
- Standard fields plus plan-specific:
: Existing functionality (if file exists)currentContent
: Specific changes plannedplannedChanges
: How changes affect other componentschangeImpactAnalysis
: New test cases neededtestingRequirements
: How component maps to spec sectionsspecificationMapping
: Existing test cases needing modificationtestCaseImpact
PHASE 1C: SPECIFICATION MAPPING ANALYSIS
- Test Case Mapping: Which existing test cases are affected
- Business Requirement Mapping: How new requirements relate to existing
- Entity Relationship Impact: Changes to entity relationships
- Workflow Integration: How new workflows integrate with existing
- Coverage Gap Analysis: Areas where new test cases needed
PHASE 1D: OVERALL ANALYSIS
Write comprehensive summary showing:
- Complete end-to-end workflows affected
- Architectural patterns impacted
- Business logic workflow changes
- Integration points affected
- Comprehensive test coverage requirements
PHASE 2: COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS AND PLANNING
Generate detailed analysis under these headings:
-
Implementation Impact Analysis: Component impact, integration points, data flow changes, platform compliance
-
Business Logic Analysis: New business rules, modified workflows, validation requirements
-
Testing Strategy Analysis: Test coverage requirements, new test scenarios, regression testing needs
-
Specification Update Strategy: How to integrate new requirements, maintain traceability, preserve existing coverage
-
Rollback and Safety Strategy: Backup procedures, rollback plan, validation checkpoints
PHASE 3: APPROVAL GATE
CRITICAL: Present comprehensive analysis for explicit approval. DO NOT proceed without it.
PHASE 4: SPECIFICATION UPDATE EXECUTION
Once approved, execute with MANDATORY steps:
- Backup Original Specification
- Read and Parse Existing Specification
- Execute Planned Updates:
- New Requirements Integration
- Entity Relationship Updates
- Test Case Enhancement
- Traceability Matrix Updates
- Coverage Analysis Updates
- Maintain Specification Structure
- Quality Assurance Validation
SUCCESS VALIDATION
Verify under
## Specification Validation:
- Requirements Traceability: All plan requirements mapped
- Test Coverage Validation: All changes covered by tests
- Business Workflow Validation: End-to-end workflows documented
- Integration Testing Coverage: Cross-service impacts covered
- Regression Prevention: Existing functionality protected
Plan Analysis Guidelines
- Plan-Driven Analysis: Base all analysis on the detailed implementation plan
- Specification Structure Preservation: Maintain standardized specification format
- Comprehensive Impact Assessment: Analyze direct and indirect effects
- End-to-End Workflow Mapping: Understand affected business processes
- Enterprise Architecture Awareness: Respect platform patterns
- Quality-Focused Testing: Create comprehensive test specifications
- Specification Completeness: Ensure full traceability
- Risk Assessment and Mitigation: Identify risks and provide rollback strategies
- Bidirectional Traceability: Maintain clear mapping between plan and spec
- Coverage Preservation: Maintain existing test coverage while adding new
Related
-
planning -
feature-implementation -
MANDATORY FINAL TASKS: After creating all planning todo tasks, ALWAYS add these three final tasks:
- Task: "Write test specifications for each phase" — Add
with TC-{FEAT}-{NNN} IDs to every phase file. Use## Test Specifications
if feature docs exist. Use/tdd-spec
for TDD-first mode.Evidence: TBD - Task: "Run /plan-validate" — Trigger
skill to interview the user with critical questions and validate plan assumptions/plan-validate - Task: "Run /plan-review" — Trigger
skill to auto-review plan for validity, correctness, and best practices/plan-review
- Task: "Write test specifications for each phase" — Add
REMINDER — Planning-Only Skill
DO NOT use
tool. DO NOT start implementing. ALWAYS validate with user approval after analysis. ASK user to confirm findings before any execution begins. ASK user for clarification when multiple approaches exist.EnterPlanMode
Closing Reminders
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using
BEFORE startingTaskCreate - MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search codebase for 3+ similar patterns before creating new code
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite
evidence for every claim (confidence >80% to act)file:line - MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION include Test Specifications section and story_points in plan frontmatter <!-- SYNC:plan-quality:reminder -->
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION include
with TC IDs per phase. Call## Test Specifications
before creating new tasks. <!-- /SYNC:plan-quality:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:understand-code-first:reminder -->TaskList - MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search 3+ existing patterns and read code BEFORE any modification. Run graph trace when graph.db exists. <!-- /SYNC:understand-code-first:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning:reminder -->
- MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite
evidence for every claim. Confidence >80% to act, <60% = do NOT recommend. <!-- /SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:iterative-phase-quality:reminder -->file:line - MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION score complexity first. Score >=6 → decompose. Each phase: plan → implement → review → fix → verify. No skipping. <!-- /SYNC:iterative-phase-quality:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset:reminder -->
- MUST ATTENTION apply critical thinking — every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact. <!-- /SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder -->
- MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — holistic-first debugging, fix at responsible layer, surface ambiguity before coding, re-read files after compaction. <!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder -->