Claude-skills plan-interview
Adaptive interview-driven spec generation. Use when converting rough plans into comprehensive specifications, needing structured requirements gathering, or transforming ideas into implementation-ready documentation.
install
source · Clone the upstream repo
git clone https://github.com/secondsky/claude-skills
Claude Code · Install into ~/.claude/skills/
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/secondsky/claude-skills "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/plugins/plan-interview/skills/plan-interview" ~/.claude/skills/secondsky-claude-skills-plan-interview && rm -rf "$T"
manifest:
plugins/plan-interview/skills/plan-interview/SKILL.mdsource content
Plan Interview Skill
Transform rough plans into comprehensive, implementation-ready specifications through adaptive, structured interviews.
When to Use
- Converting a plan or idea into a detailed specification
- Gathering requirements through structured questioning
- Transforming rough documentation into implementation-ready specs
- Ensuring all edge cases, risks, and stakeholders are considered before implementation
Available Components
Command: /plan-interview:interview [plan-file]
/plan-interview:interview [plan-file]Adaptive interview that calibrates depth based on plan complexity:
| Complexity | Signals | Questions |
|---|---|---|
| Simple | Single feature, clear scope | 10-15 |
| Moderate | Multi-component, some integrations | 18-23 |
| Complex | Cross-system, many stakeholders | 22-28 |
Usage:
/plan-interview:interview docs/feature-plan.md # Output: docs/feature-plan-spec.md
Agent: spec-reviewer
spec-reviewerAutonomous quality analysis of specifications across 4 dimensions:
- Completeness (25 pts) - All sections populated?
- Consistency (25 pts) - No contradictions?
- Clarity (25 pts) - No ambiguous language?
- Edge Cases (25 pts) - Error handling defined?
Triggers when you say "review my spec" or "check specification quality".
Interview Phases
- Foundations & Scope - Stakeholders, success criteria, constraints, MVP scope
- Technical Deep-Dive - Architecture, data models, scalability, security
- User Experience - Personas, flows, cognitive load, error recovery
- Risks & Tradeoffs - Risk categorization, blast radius, contingency plans
- Operationalization - Testing, deployment, monitoring
- Wrap-Up (optional) - Only for complex plans with remaining gaps
Interview Philosophy
Core Principle: Depth over breadth. Better to deeply understand critical aspects than superficially cover everything.
Key Techniques:
- Non-obvious questions - Skip what the plan already answers
- Edge probing - What happens in unusual cases?
- Assumption surfacing - Make implicit beliefs explicit
- Contradiction detection - Flag when answers don't align
- Adaptive depth - Probe deeper on complex areas, move faster on clear ones
Spec Output Structure
Generated specs include:
- Overview (problem, solution, success criteria, stakeholders)
- Functional and non-functional requirements
- Technical design (architecture, data models, APIs, security)
- User experience (personas, flows, states, edge cases)
- Risks and mitigations (risk register, tradeoffs, contingency plans)
- Implementation notes (key decisions, dependencies, migration)
- Operationalization (testing, deployment, monitoring)
- Open questions and out-of-scope items
- Phasing (MVP vs future)
References
Load these for deeper guidance during interviews:
- Foundations questions and pitfallsreferences/phase-1-clarifications.md
- Architecture discussion patternsreferences/phase-2-technical.md
- Persona development, UX patternsreferences/phase-3-ux.md
- Risk assessment frameworksreferences/phase-4-risks.md
- Cross-cutting interview skillsreferences/interview-techniques.md
- Annotated high-quality spec examplereferences/example-spec.md