OpenClaw-Medical-Skills writing-plans
Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code
git clone https://github.com/FreedomIntelligence/OpenClaw-Medical-Skills
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/FreedomIntelligence/OpenClaw-Medical-Skills "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/writing-plans" ~/.claude/skills/freedomintelligence-openclaw-medical-skills-writing-plans && rm -rf "$T"
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/FreedomIntelligence/OpenClaw-Medical-Skills "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.openclaw/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/writing-plans" ~/.openclaw/skills/freedomintelligence-openclaw-medical-skills-writing-plans && rm -rf "$T"
skills/writing-plans/SKILL.mdWriting Plans
Overview
Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for our codebase and questionable taste. Document everything they need to know: which files to touch for each task, code, testing, docs they might need to check, how to test it. Give them the whole plan as bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.
Assume they are a skilled developer, but know almost nothing about our toolset or problem domain. Assume they don't know good test design very well.
Announce at start: "I'm using the writing-plans skill to create the implementation plan."
Context: This should be run in a dedicated worktree (created by brainstorming skill).
Save plans to:
docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<feature-name>.md
Bite-Sized Task Granularity
Each step is one action (2-5 minutes):
- "Write the failing test" - step
- "Run it to make sure it fails" - step
- "Implement the minimal code to make the test pass" - step
- "Run the tests and make sure they pass" - step
- "Commit" - step
Plan Document Header
Every plan MUST start with this header:
# [Feature Name] Implementation Plan > **For Claude:** REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: Use superpowers:executing-plans to implement this plan task-by-task. **Goal:** [One sentence describing what this builds] **Architecture:** [2-3 sentences about approach] **Tech Stack:** [Key technologies/libraries] ---
Task Structure
### Task N: [Component Name] **Files:** - Create: `exact/path/to/file.py` - Modify: `exact/path/to/existing.py:123-145` - Test: `tests/exact/path/to/test.py` **Step 1: Write the failing test** ```python def test_specific_behavior(): result = function(input) assert result == expected ``` **Step 2: Run test to verify it fails** Run: `pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v` Expected: FAIL with "function not defined" **Step 3: Write minimal implementation** ```python def function(input): return expected ``` **Step 4: Run test to verify it passes** Run: `pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v` Expected: PASS **Step 5: Commit** ```bash git add tests/path/test.py src/path/file.py git commit -m "feat: add specific feature" ```
Remember
- Exact file paths always
- Complete code in plan (not "add validation")
- Exact commands with expected output
- Reference relevant skills with @ syntax
- DRY, YAGNI, TDD, frequent commits
Execution Handoff
After saving the plan, offer execution choice:
"Plan complete and saved to
. Two execution options:docs/plans/<filename>.md
1. Subagent-Driven (this session) - I dispatch fresh subagent per task, review between tasks, fast iteration
2. Parallel Session (separate) - Open new session with executing-plans, batch execution with checkpoints
Which approach?"
If Subagent-Driven chosen:
- REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: Use superpowers:subagent-driven-development
- Stay in this session
- Fresh subagent per task + code review
If Parallel Session chosen:
- Guide them to open new session in worktree
- REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: New session uses superpowers:executing-plans