/prp-plan

Adapted from PRPs-agentic-eng by Wirasm. Part of the PRP workflow series.

PRP Plan

Create a detailed, self-contained implementation plan that captures all codebase patterns, conventions, and context needed to implement a feature in a single pass.

Core Philosophy: A great plan contains everything needed to implement without asking further questions. Every pattern, every convention, every gotcha — captured once, referenced throughout.

Golden Rule: If you would need to search the codebase during implementation, capture that knowledge NOW in the plan.

---

Phase 0 — DETECT

Determine input type from $ARGUMENTS:

Input Pattern	Detection	Action
Path ending in .prd.md	File path to PRD	Parse PRD, find next pending phase
Path to .md with "Implementation Phases"	PRD-like document	Parse phases, find next pending
Path to any other file	Reference file	Read file for context, treat as free-form
Free-form text	Feature description	Proceed directly to Phase 1
Empty / blank	No input	Ask user what feature to plan

PRD Parsing (when input is a PRD)

1. Read the PRD file with cat "$PRD_PATH"
2. Parse the Implementation Phases section
3. Find phases by status:
   • Look for pending phases
   • Check dependency chains (a phase may depend on prior phases being complete)
   • Select the next eligible pending phase
4. Extract from the selected phase:
   • Phase name and description
   • Acceptance criteria
   • Dependencies on prior phases
   • Any scope notes or constraints
5. Use the phase description as the feature to plan

If no pending phases remain, report that all phases are complete.

---

Phase 1 — PARSE

Extract and clarify the feature requirements.

Feature Understanding

From the input (PRD phase or free-form description), identify:

• What is being built (concrete deliverable)
• Why it matters (user value)
• Who uses it (target user/system)
• Where it fits (which part of the codebase)

User Story

Format as:

As a [type of user],
I want [capability],
So that [benefit].

Complexity Assessment

Level	Indicators	Typical Scope
Small	Single file, isolated change, no new dependencies	1-3 files, <100 lines
Medium	Multiple files, follows existing patterns, minor new concepts	3-10 files, 100-500 lines
Large	Cross-cutting concerns, new patterns, external integrations	10+ files, 500+ lines
XL	Architectural changes, new subsystems, migration needed	20+ files, consider splitting

Ambiguity Gate

If any of these are unclear, STOP and ask the user before proceeding:

• The core deliverable is vague
• Success criteria are undefined
• There are multiple valid interpretations
• Technical approach has major unknowns

Do NOT guess. Ask. A plan built on assumptions fails during implementation.

---

Phase 2 — EXPLORE

Gather deep codebase intelligence. Search the codebase directly for each category below.

Codebase Search (8 Categories)

For each category, search using grep, find, and file reading:

1. Similar Implementations — Find existing features that resemble the planned one. Look for analogous patterns, endpoints, components, or modules.

2. Naming Conventions — Identify how files, functions, variables, classes, and exports are named in the relevant area of the codebase.

3. Error Handling — Find how errors are caught, propagated, logged, and returned to users in similar code paths.

4. Logging Patterns — Identify what gets logged, at what level, and in what format.

5. Type Definitions — Find relevant types, interfaces, schemas, and how they're organized.

6. Test Patterns — Find how similar features are tested. Note test file locations, naming, setup/teardown patterns, and assertion styles.

7. Configuration — Find relevant config files, environment variables, and feature flags.

8. Dependencies — Identify packages, imports, and internal modules used by similar features.

Codebase Analysis (5 Traces)

Read relevant files to trace:

1. Entry Points — How does a request/action enter the system and reach the area you're modifying?
2. Data Flow — How does data move through the relevant code paths?
3. State Changes — What state is modified and where?
4. Contracts — What interfaces, APIs, or protocols must be honored?
5. Patterns — What architectural patterns are used (repository, service, controller, etc.)?

Unified Discovery Table

Compile findings into a single reference:

Category	File:Lines	Pattern	Key Snippet
Naming	src/services/userService.ts:1-5	camelCase services, PascalCase types	export class UserService
Error	src/middleware/errorHandler.ts:10-25	Custom AppError class	throw new AppError(...)
...	...	...	...

---

Phase 3 — RESEARCH

If the feature involves external libraries, APIs, or unfamiliar technology:

1. Search the web for official documentation
2. Find usage examples and best practices
3. Identify version-specific gotchas

Format each finding as:

KEY_INSIGHT: [what you learned]
APPLIES_TO: [which part of the plan this affects]
GOTCHA: [any warnings or version-specific issues]

If the feature uses only well-understood internal patterns, skip this phase and note: "No external research needed — feature uses established internal patterns."

---

Phase 4 — DESIGN

UX Transformation (if applicable)

Document the before/after user experience:

Before:

┌─────────────────────────────┐
│  [Current user experience]  │
│  Show the current flow,     │
│  what the user sees/does    │
└─────────────────────────────┘

After:

┌─────────────────────────────┐
│  [New user experience]      │
│  Show the improved flow,    │
│  what changes for the user  │
└─────────────────────────────┘

Interaction Changes

Touchpoint	Before	After	Notes
...	...	...	...

If the feature is purely backend/internal with no UX change, note: "Internal change — no user-facing UX transformation."

---

Phase 5 — ARCHITECT

Strategic Design

Define the implementation approach:

• Approach: High-level strategy (e.g., "Add new service layer following existing repository pattern")
• Alternatives Considered: What other approaches were evaluated and why they were rejected
• Scope: Concrete boundaries of what WILL be built
• NOT Building: Explicit list of what is OUT OF SCOPE (prevents scope creep during implementation)

---

Phase 6 — GENERATE

Write the full plan document using the template below. Save to .claude/PRPs/plans/{kebab-case-feature-name}.plan.md.

Create the directory if it doesn't exist:

mkdir -p .claude/PRPs/plans

Plan Template

# Plan: [Feature Name]

## Summary
[2-3 sentence overview]

## User Story
As a [user], I want [capability], so that [benefit].

## Problem → Solution
[Current state] → [Desired state]

## Metadata
- **Complexity**: [Small | Medium | Large | XL]
- **Source PRD**: [path or "N/A"]
- **PRD Phase**: [phase name or "N/A"]
- **Estimated Files**: [count]

---

## UX Design

### Before
[ASCII diagram or "N/A — internal change"]

### After
[ASCII diagram or "N/A — internal change"]

### Interaction Changes
| Touchpoint | Before | After | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|

---

## Mandatory Reading

Files that MUST be read before implementing:

| Priority | File | Lines | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| P0 (critical) | `path/to/file` | 1-50 | Core pattern to follow |
| P1 (important) | `path/to/file` | 10-30 | Related types |
| P2 (reference) | `path/to/file` | all | Similar implementation |

## External Documentation

| Topic | Source | Key Takeaway |
|---|---|---|
| ... | ... | ... |

---

## Patterns to Mirror

Code patterns discovered in the codebase. Follow these exactly.

### NAMING_CONVENTION
// SOURCE: [file:lines]
[actual code snippet showing the naming pattern]

### ERROR_HANDLING
// SOURCE: [file:lines]
[actual code snippet showing error handling]

### LOGGING_PATTERN
// SOURCE: [file:lines]
[actual code snippet showing logging]

### REPOSITORY_PATTERN
// SOURCE: [file:lines]
[actual code snippet showing data access]

### SERVICE_PATTERN
// SOURCE: [file:lines]
[actual code snippet showing service layer]

### TEST_STRUCTURE
// SOURCE: [file:lines]
[actual code snippet showing test setup]

---

## Files to Change

| File | Action | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| `path/to/file.ts` | CREATE | New service for feature |
| `path/to/existing.ts` | UPDATE | Add new method |

## NOT Building

- [Explicit item 1 that is out of scope]
- [Explicit item 2 that is out of scope]

---

## Step-by-Step Tasks

### Task 1: [Name]
- **ACTION**: [What to do]
- **IMPLEMENT**: [Specific code/logic to write]
- **MIRROR**: [Pattern from Patterns to Mirror section to follow]
- **IMPORTS**: [Required imports]
- **GOTCHA**: [Known pitfall to avoid]
- **VALIDATE**: [How to verify this task is correct]

### Task 2: [Name]
- **ACTION**: ...
- **IMPLEMENT**: ...
- **MIRROR**: ...
- **IMPORTS**: ...
- **GOTCHA**: ...
- **VALIDATE**: ...

[Continue for all tasks...]

---

## Testing Strategy

### Unit Tests

| Test | Input | Expected Output | Edge Case? |
|---|---|---|---|
| ... | ... | ... | ... |

### Edge Cases Checklist
- [ ] Empty input
- [ ] Maximum size input
- [ ] Invalid types
- [ ] Concurrent access
- [ ] Network failure (if applicable)
- [ ] Permission denied

---

## Validation Commands

### Static Analysis
```bash
# Run type checker
[project-specific type check command]
```
EXPECT: Zero type errors

### Unit Tests
```bash
# Run tests for affected area
[project-specific test command]
```
EXPECT: All tests pass

### Full Test Suite
```bash
# Run complete test suite
[project-specific full test command]
```
EXPECT: No regressions

### Database Validation (if applicable)
```bash
# Verify schema/migrations
[project-specific db command]
```
EXPECT: Schema up to date

### Browser Validation (if applicable)
```bash
# Start dev server and verify
[project-specific dev server command]
```
EXPECT: Feature works as designed

### Manual Validation
- [ ] [Step-by-step manual verification checklist]

---

## Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] All tasks completed
- [ ] All validation commands pass
- [ ] Tests written and passing
- [ ] No type errors
- [ ] No lint errors
- [ ] Matches UX design (if applicable)

## Completion Checklist
- [ ] Code follows discovered patterns
- [ ] Error handling matches codebase style
- [ ] Logging follows codebase conventions
- [ ] Tests follow test patterns
- [ ] No hardcoded values
- [ ] Documentation updated (if needed)
- [ ] No unnecessary scope additions
- [ ] Self-contained — no questions needed during implementation

## Risks
| Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|
| ... | ... | ... | ... |

## Notes
[Any additional context, decisions, or observations]
```

---

## Output

### Save the Plan

Write the generated plan to:
```
.claude/PRPs/plans/{kebab-case-feature-name}.plan.md
```

### Update PRD (if input was a PRD)

If this plan was generated from a PRD phase:
1. Update the phase status from `pending` to `in-progress`
2. Add the plan file path as a reference in the phase

### Report to User

```
## Plan Created

- **File**: .claude/PRPs/plans/{kebab-case-feature-name}.plan.md
- **Source PRD**: [path or "N/A"]
- **Phase**: [phase name or "standalone"]
- **Complexity**: [level]
- **Scope**: [N files, M tasks]
- **Key Patterns**: [top 3 discovered patterns]
- **External Research**: [topics researched or "none needed"]
- **Risks**: [top risk or "none identified"]
- **Confidence Score**: [1-10] — likelihood of single-pass implementation

> Next step: Run `/prp-implement .claude/PRPs/plans/{name}.plan.md` to execute this plan.
```

---

## Verification

Before finalizing, verify the plan against these checklists:

### Context Completeness
- [ ] All relevant files discovered and documented
- [ ] Naming conventions captured with examples
- [ ] Error handling patterns documented
- [ ] Test patterns identified
- [ ] Dependencies listed

### Implementation Readiness
- [ ] Every task has ACTION, IMPLEMENT, MIRROR, and VALIDATE
- [ ] No task requires additional codebase searching
- [ ] Import paths are specified
- [ ] GOTCHAs documented where applicable

### Pattern Faithfulness
- [ ] Code snippets are actual codebase examples (not invented)
- [ ] SOURCE references point to real files and line numbers
- [ ] Patterns cover naming, errors, logging, data access, and tests
- [ ] New code will be indistinguishable from existing code

### Validation Coverage
- [ ] Static analysis commands specified
- [ ] Test commands specified
- [ ] Build verification included

### UX Clarity
- [ ] Before/after states documented (or marked N/A)
- [ ] Interaction changes listed
- [ ] Edge cases for UX identified

### No Prior Knowledge Test
A developer unfamiliar with this codebase should be able to implement the feature using ONLY this plan, without searching the codebase or asking questions. If not, add the missing context.

---

## Next Steps

- Run `/prp-implement <plan-path>` to execute this plan
- Run `/plan` for quick conversational planning without artifacts
- Run `/prp-prd` to create a PRD first if scope is unclear