Hermes-agent writing-plans
Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task. Creates comprehensive implementation plans with bite-sized tasks, exact file paths, and complete code examples.
git clone https://github.com/NousResearch/hermes-agent
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/NousResearch/hermes-agent "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/software-development/writing-plans" ~/.claude/skills/nousresearch-hermes-agent-writing-plans-15c28b && rm -rf "$T"
skills/software-development/writing-plans/SKILL.mdWriting Implementation Plans
Overview
Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the implementer has zero context for the codebase and questionable taste. Document everything they need: which files to touch, complete code, testing commands, docs to check, how to verify. Give them bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.
Assume the implementer is a skilled developer but knows almost nothing about the toolset or problem domain. Assume they don't know good test design very well.
Core principle: A good plan makes implementation obvious. If someone has to guess, the plan is incomplete.
When to Use
Always use before:
- Implementing multi-step features
- Breaking down complex requirements
- Delegating to subagents via subagent-driven-development
Don't skip when:
- Feature seems simple (assumptions cause bugs)
- You plan to implement it yourself (future you needs guidance)
- Working alone (documentation matters)
Bite-Sized Task Granularity
Each task = 2-5 minutes of focused work.
Every step is one action:
- "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
Too big:
### Task 1: Build authentication system [50 lines of code across 5 files]
Right size:
### Task 1: Create User model with email field [10 lines, 1 file] ### Task 2: Add password hash field to User [8 lines, 1 file] ### Task 3: Create password hashing utility [15 lines, 1 file]
Plan Document Structure
Header (Required)
Every plan MUST start with:
# [Feature Name] Implementation Plan > **For Hermes:** Use subagent-driven-development skill 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
Each task follows this format:
### Task N: [Descriptive Name] **Objective:** What this task accomplishes (one sentence) **Files:** - Create: `exact/path/to/new_file.py` - Modify: `exact/path/to/existing.py:45-67` (line numbers if known) - Test: `tests/path/to/test_file.py` **Step 1: Write failing test** ```python def test_specific_behavior(): result = function(input) assert result == expected ``` **Step 2: Run test to verify failure** Run: `pytest tests/path/test.py::test_specific_behavior -v` Expected: FAIL — "function not defined" **Step 3: Write minimal implementation** ```python def function(input): return expected ``` **Step 4: Run test to verify pass** Run: `pytest tests/path/test.py::test_specific_behavior -v` Expected: PASS **Step 5: Commit** ```bash git add tests/path/test.py src/path/file.py git commit -m "feat: add specific feature" ```
Writing Process
Step 1: Understand Requirements
Read and understand:
- Feature requirements
- Design documents or user description
- Acceptance criteria
- Constraints
Step 2: Explore the Codebase
Use Hermes tools to understand the project:
# Understand project structure search_files("*.py", target="files", path="src/") # Look at similar features search_files("similar_pattern", path="src/", file_glob="*.py") # Check existing tests search_files("*.py", target="files", path="tests/") # Read key files read_file("src/app.py")
Step 3: Design Approach
Decide:
- Architecture pattern
- File organization
- Dependencies needed
- Testing strategy
Step 4: Write Tasks
Create tasks in order:
- Setup/infrastructure
- Core functionality (TDD for each)
- Edge cases
- Integration
- Cleanup/documentation
Step 5: Add Complete Details
For each task, include:
- Exact file paths (not "the config file" but
)src/config/settings.py - Complete code examples (not "add validation" but the actual code)
- Exact commands with expected output
- Verification steps that prove the task works
Step 6: Review the Plan
Check:
- Tasks are sequential and logical
- Each task is bite-sized (2-5 min)
- File paths are exact
- Code examples are complete (copy-pasteable)
- Commands are exact with expected output
- No missing context
- DRY, YAGNI, TDD principles applied
Step 7: Save the Plan
mkdir -p docs/plans # Save plan to docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-feature-name.md git add docs/plans/ git commit -m "docs: add implementation plan for [feature]"
Principles
DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself)
Bad: Copy-paste validation in 3 places Good: Extract validation function, use everywhere
YAGNI (You Aren't Gonna Need It)
Bad: Add "flexibility" for future requirements Good: Implement only what's needed now
# Bad — YAGNI violation class User: def __init__(self, name, email): self.name = name self.email = email self.preferences = {} # Not needed yet! self.metadata = {} # Not needed yet! # Good — YAGNI class User: def __init__(self, name, email): self.name = name self.email = email
TDD (Test-Driven Development)
Every task that produces code should include the full TDD cycle:
- Write failing test
- Run to verify failure
- Write minimal code
- Run to verify pass
See
test-driven-development skill for details.
Frequent Commits
Commit after every task:
git add [files] git commit -m "type: description"
Common Mistakes
Vague Tasks
Bad: "Add authentication" Good: "Create User model with email and password_hash fields"
Incomplete Code
Bad: "Step 1: Add validation function" Good: "Step 1: Add validation function" followed by the complete function code
Missing Verification
Bad: "Step 3: Test it works" Good: "Step 3: Run
pytest tests/test_auth.py -v, expected: 3 passed"
Missing File Paths
Bad: "Create the model file" Good: "Create:
src/models/user.py"
Execution Handoff
After saving the plan, offer the execution approach:
"Plan complete and saved. Ready to execute using subagent-driven-development — I'll dispatch a fresh subagent per task with two-stage review (spec compliance then code quality). Shall I proceed?"
When executing, use the
subagent-driven-development skill:
- Fresh
per task with full contextdelegate_task - Spec compliance review after each task
- Code quality review after spec passes
- Proceed only when both reviews approve
Remember
Bite-sized tasks (2-5 min each) Exact file paths Complete code (copy-pasteable) Exact commands with expected output Verification steps DRY, YAGNI, TDD Frequent commits
A good plan makes implementation obvious.