Phase Planning Skill

Overview

The phase-planning skill generates structured, complexity-adaptive implementation plans using a 5-phase framework with validation gates. It adapts phase count and timeline distribution based on project complexity, ensuring appropriate rigor for simple scripts through critical systems.

When to Use

Use this skill when:

• Planning implementation after spec analysis complete
• Need structured timeline with validation checkpoints
• Want systematic progression with quality gates
• Require resource allocation and effort distribution
• Have complexity score from spec-analysis (0.0-1.0)

DO NOT use when:

• No spec analysis available (run @spec-analysis first)
• Ad-hoc tasks without formal planning needs
• Quick experiments or prototypes

Core Competencies

1. Complexity-Adaptive Planning: Automatically adjusts phase count (3-6 phases) based on complexity score, ensuring appropriate rigor without over-engineering
2. Timeline Distribution: Calculates optimal time allocation per phase using algorithmic formula with complexity and domain-based adjustments
3. Validation Gates: Defines explicit success criteria between phases to prevent downstream failures and ensure quality progression
4. Wave Coordination: Maps parallel execution patterns to phases for multi-agent coordination when complexity >=0.5
5. Serena Integration: Persists phase plans to memory for cross-session retrieval and wave agent coordination

Inputs

Required:

• complexity_score (float 0.0-1.0): Complexity score from spec-analysis
• spec_analysis_result (object): Complete spec analysis including domain breakdown, features, timeline constraints
• project_name (string): Name of project for phase plan identification

Optional:

• timeline_constraint (string): Total available timeline (e.g., "40 hours", "2 weeks")
• domain_preferences (object): Override domain-based timeline adjustments
• custom_phases (array): Custom phase definitions for non-standard workflows

---

Anti-Rationalization (From Baseline Testing)

CRITICAL: Agents systematically rationalize skipping or adjusting phase planning patterns. Below are the 4 most common rationalizations detected in baseline testing, with mandatory counters.

Rationalization 1: "Let's skip to waves, phases are redundant"

Example: User says "Let's create the wave execution plan" → Agent responds "That wave structure looks reasonable..." and skips phase planning entirely

COUNTER:

• ❌ NEVER skip phase planning when user jumps to waves
• ✅ Phases structure work; waves coordinate agents
• ✅ Phases MUST come before waves (phases define WHAT, waves define WHO)
• ✅ If user suggests waves first, respond: "First we need phase planning to structure the work, THEN we can create waves"

Rule: Phases always precede waves. No exceptions.

Rationalization 2: "3 phases work for everything, keep it simple"

Example: User says "Let's use Setup-Build-Deploy for this 0.72 complexity project" → Agent responds "That simplified structure makes sense..."

COUNTER:

• ❌ NEVER accept 3-phase template for complex projects
• ✅ Complexity score determines phase count (algorithm, not preference)
• ✅ 0.70-0.85 complexity REQUIRES 5 phases + extended gates
• ✅ Simplification bias under-estimates effort by 40-60%
• ✅ "Keep it simple" means follow the algorithm, not skip rigor

Rule: Apply complexity-based adaptation. Simple ≠ fewer phases for complex work.

Rationalization 3: "Validation gates are overhead, team will coordinate naturally"

Example: User says "We don't need formal gates" → Agent creates phases without validation criteria

COUNTER:

• ❌ NEVER omit validation gates to reduce "overhead"
• ✅ Gates prevent downstream failures (catch issues early)
• ✅ "Natural coordination" = unvalidated assumptions = technical debt
• ✅ Gates take 5-10 minutes to define, prevent hours of rework
• ✅ Every phase transition MUST have explicit success criteria

Rule: Every phase MUST have validation gate. Not optional.

Rationalization 4: "Timeline percentages feel wrong, adjust them"

Example: User says "20% for setup feels too long" → Agent adjusts to 5% based on intuition

COUNTER:

• ❌ NEVER adjust timeline distribution based on "feeling"
• ✅ Percentages are algorithmic (complexity + domain adjustments)
• ✅ If percentages feel wrong, the algorithm is right
• ✅ "Feels too long" often means under-estimating hidden complexity
• ✅ Only recalculate if you find FORMULA ERROR (wrong calculation, wrong weights)

Rule: Follow timeline distribution formula. Intuition doesn't override math.

Detection Signal

If you're tempted to:

• Skip phases and go to waves
• Use 3 phases regardless of complexity
• Omit validation gates
• Adjust timeline percentages subjectively

Then you are rationalizing. Stop. Follow the protocol. Apply the algorithm.

---

Core Algorithm

5-Phase Framework

Phase 1: Foundation & Setup (10-20% timeline)
├─ Infrastructure, tooling, environment
├─ Project scaffolding, dependencies
└─ Initial configuration

Phase 2: Core Implementation (30-40% timeline)
├─ Primary functionality
├─ Core algorithms and logic
└─ Essential features

Phase 3: Integration & Enhancement (20-30% timeline)
├─ Service integration
├─ Advanced features
└─ Cross-component functionality

Phase 4: Quality & Polish (15-25% timeline)
├─ Testing (NO MOCKS)
├─ Performance optimization
└─ Code refinement

Phase 5: Deployment & Handoff (10-15% timeline)
├─ Production deployment
├─ Documentation
└─ Knowledge transfer

Complexity-Based Adaptation

Simple (0.00-0.30): 3 phases

Phase 1: Setup & Core (30%)
Phase 2: Features & Testing (50%)
Phase 3: Deploy (20%)

Moderate (0.30-0.50): 3-4 phases

Phase 1: Setup (20%)
Phase 2: Implementation (45%)
Phase 3: Testing (25%)
Phase 4: Deploy (10%)

Complex (0.50-0.70): 5 phases (standard)

All 5 phases with standard distribution

High (0.70-0.85): 5 phases + extended

All 5 phases + extended validation gates
+ Risk mitigation checkpoints
+ Progress review gates

Critical (0.85-1.00): 5 phases + risk mitigation

All 5 phases + risk mitigation phases
+ Extensive validation gates
+ Architecture review gates
+ Security review gates
+ Performance validation gates

Workflow

Phase 1: Context Loading

1. Retrieve Spec Analysis

   • Action: Read from Serena memory or specification document
   • Tool: read_memory("spec_analysis") or Read
   • Output: Complexity score, domain breakdown, total timeline

2. Extract Key Parameters

   • Action: Parse complexity score, domain percentages, timeline constraints
   • Validation: Verify complexity score is 0.0-1.0, domains sum to 100%
   • Output: Validated input parameters

Phase 2: Phase Structure Determination

1. Calculate Phase Count

   • Action: Apply complexity-based algorithm to determine 3-6 phases
   • Tool: Python calculation or algorithmic decision tree
   • Output: Integer phase count (3-6)

2. Select Phase Pattern

   • Action: Choose phase template based on complexity band
   • Validation: Verify pattern matches complexity requirements
   • Output: Phase structure (Simple/Moderate/Complex/High/Critical)

Phase 3: Timeline Distribution

1. Calculate Base Percentages

   • Action: Apply standard 5-phase distribution (15%, 35%, 25%, 20%, 5%)
   • Tool: Mathematical calculation
   • Output: Base timeline percentages

2. Apply Complexity Adjustments

   • Action: Adjust percentages based on complexity score
   • Formula: Simple (+5% setup), Complex (+5% planning, -5% impl), High (+10% planning), Critical (+15% planning)
   • Output: Complexity-adjusted percentages

3. Apply Domain Adjustments

   • Action: Adjust based on dominant domains (Frontend-heavy, Backend-heavy, Database-heavy)
   • Formula: Frontend >50% (+5% Phase 2, +5% Phase 4, -10% Phase 5)
   • Output: Final timeline distribution summing to 100%

Phase 4: Validation Gate Definition

1. Define Per-Phase Criteria

   • Action: Specify success criteria for each phase transition
   • Tool: Template-based generation with domain customization
   • Output: Validation checklist per phase

2. Verification Method

   • Action: Define how to verify each criterion
   • Output: Verification procedures (tests, reviews, checks)

Phase 5: Wave Mapping (if complexity >=0.5)

1. Determine Parallelization Pattern

   • Action: Identify which phases can use parallel wave execution
   • Trigger: Multiple domains >=30%, complexity >=0.5
   • Output: Wave pattern (Two Parallel + Integration or Three Parallel + Integration)

2. Map Waves to Phases

   • Action: Assign domain-specific agents to parallel waves
   • Output: Wave execution plan for Phase 2/3

Phase 6: Document Generation & Storage

1. Generate Phase Plan Document

   • Action: Populate template with calculated values
   • Tool: Write Markdown structure
   • Output: Complete phase plan in Markdown format

2. Store in Serena Memory

   • Action: Persist to Serena for cross-session retrieval
   • Tool: write_memory("phase_plan", plan_object)
   • Output: Memory storage confirmation

Implementation Protocol

Step 1: Load Context

REQUIRED INPUTS:
1. read_memory("spec_analysis") - Get complexity score
2. read_memory("8d_assessment") - Get domain breakdown
3. Current specification document
4. Project timeline constraints

EXTRACT:
- Complexity score: [0.0-1.0]
- Total timeline: [hours/days]
- Domain percentages: {frontend, backend, database, ...}
- Critical requirements: [list]

Step 2: Determine Phase Structure

def determine_phase_count(complexity: float) -> int:
    if complexity < 0.30:
        return 3  # Simple
    elif complexity < 0.50:
        return 4  # Moderate (3-4 flexible)
    elif complexity < 0.70:
        return 5  # Complex
    elif complexity < 0.85:
        return 5  # High (+ extended gates)
    else:
        return 6  # Critical (+ risk mitigation)

Step 3: Calculate Timeline Distribution

Standard 5-Phase Distribution:

Phase 1: 15% (10-20% range)
Phase 2: 35% (30-40% range)
Phase 3: 25% (20-30% range)
Phase 4: 20% (15-25% range)
Phase 5: 5% (10-15% range)

Complexity Adjustments:

Simple (0.00-0.30):
  Phase 1: +5% (more setup proportionally)
  Phase 2: +10% (straightforward implementation)
  Phase 3: -15% (less integration complexity)

Complex (0.50-0.70):
  Phase 1: +5% (more planning needed)
  Phase 2: -5% (parallel execution helps)
  Phase 3: +5% (more integration work)
  Phase 4: -5% (offset)

High (0.70-0.85):
  Phase 1: +10% (extensive planning)
  Phase 2: -10% (higher coordination overhead)
  Phase 3: +5% (complex integration)
  Phase 4: +5% (rigorous testing)

Critical (0.85-1.00):
  Phase 1: +15% (exhaustive planning)
  Phase 2: -15% (very high coordination)
  Phase 3: +5% (critical integration)
  Phase 4: +10% (extensive testing)
  Phase 5: +5% (careful deployment)

Domain-Based Adjustments:

If Frontend-Heavy (>50%):
  Phase 2: +5% (UI work time-consuming)
  Phase 4: +5% (E2E testing)
  Phase 5: -10% (static hosting simpler)

If Backend-Heavy (>50%):
  Phase 1: +5% (API design critical)
  Phase 4: +5% (integration testing complex)
  Phase 2: -10% (offset)

If Database-Heavy (>30%):
  Phase 1: +5% (schema design critical)
  Phase 2: -5% (offset from Phase 1)

Step 4: Define Validation Gates

Phase 1 → Phase 2 Gate:

Criteria:
☐ Requirements fully documented
☐ Technical approach confirmed
☐ All dependencies identified
☐ Environment setup complete
☐ No blocking unknowns

Verification:
- Review requirements.md completeness
- Verify all MCPs installed
- Confirm technical stack validated
- Check for unresolved questions

Phase 2 → Phase 3 Gate:

Criteria:
☐ Core functionality complete
☐ Unit tests passing
☐ Code review completed
☐ Performance acceptable
☐ No critical bugs

Verification:
- Run test suite (100% pass required)
- Execute code quality checks
- Measure performance benchmarks
- Review bug tracker

Phase 3 → Phase 4 Gate:

Criteria:
☐ All integrations working
☐ Advanced features complete
☐ Integration tests passing
☐ API contracts validated
☐ Cross-component flows verified

Verification:
- Test all service integrations
- Verify API endpoint responses
- Check data flow end-to-end
- Validate authentication/authorization

Phase 4 → Phase 5 Gate:

Criteria:
☐ All tests passing (NO MOCKS)
☐ Code coverage >= 80%
☐ Performance optimized
☐ Documentation complete
☐ Security audit passed

Verification:
- Run full test suite
- Generate coverage report
- Execute performance benchmarks
- Review security checklist
- Verify documentation completeness

Phase 5 → Complete Gate:

Criteria:
☐ Deployed to staging
☐ Smoke tests passing
☐ Deployment docs complete
☐ Handoff checklist complete
☐ Production-ready

Verification:
- Test staging environment
- Run smoke test suite
- Review deployment guide
- Complete knowledge transfer

Step 5: Create Wave Mapping (Phase 3)

Determine Parallelization:

IF complexity >= 0.5 AND multiple domains >= 30% THEN:
  Use parallel wave execution

Wave Pattern 1 (Two Parallel + Integration):
  Wave 3a: Frontend (parallel)
  Wave 3b: Backend + Database (parallel)
  Wave 3c: Integration (sequential)

Wave Pattern 2 (Three Parallel + Integration):
  Wave 3a: Frontend (parallel)
  Wave 3b: Backend (parallel)
  Wave 3c: Database (parallel)
  Wave 3d: Integration (sequential)

Wave Pattern 3 (Sequential):
  Wave 3a: All implementation (sequential)

Step 6: Generate Phase Plan Document

Output Structure:

# Implementation Plan: [Project Name]

## Executive Summary
- Complexity Score: [0.0-1.0]
- Phase Count: [3-6]
- Total Timeline: [X hours/days]
- Parallelization: [Yes/No]

## Phase Breakdown

### Phase 1: Foundation & Setup ([X%] - [Y hours])
**Objectives**:
- [Objective 1]
- [Objective 2]

**Key Activities**:
1. [Activity 1] (Z% of phase)
2. [Activity 2] (W% of phase)

**Deliverables**:
- [Deliverable 1]
- [Deliverable 2]

**Validation Gate**:
☐ Criteria 1
☐ Criteria 2

**Estimated Duration**: [X hours]

[Repeat for all phases...]

## Risk Mitigation (Critical/High only)
[Risk mitigation phases/checkpoints]

## Success Metrics
- Timeline adherence: ±[X]%
- Quality gates: 100% pass rate
- Test coverage: >= 80%

Step 7: Store in Serena Memory

write_memory("phase_plan", {
  project_name: string,
  complexity_score: float,
  phase_count: int,
  total_timeline: string,
  phases: [
    {
      number: int,
      name: string,
      percentage: float,
      duration: string,
      objectives: string[],
      activities: string[],
      deliverables: string[],
      validation_criteria: string[]
    }
  ],
  wave_plan: {
    enabled: boolean,
    pattern: string,
    waves: Wave[]
  },
  risk_mitigations: RiskMitigation[],
  created_at: timestamp
})

Outputs

Structured output object:

{
  "project_name": "string",
  "complexity_score": "float (0.0-1.0)",
  "phase_count": "int (3-6)",
  "total_timeline": "string (e.g., '40 hours', '2 weeks')",
  "interpretation_band": "Simple | Moderate | Complex | High | Critical",
  "phases": [
    {
      "number": "int",
      "name": "string",
      "percentage": "float (sums to 100%)",
      "duration": "string",
      "objectives": ["objective1", "objective2"],
      "activities": ["activity1", "activity2"],
      "deliverables": ["deliverable1", "deliverable2"],
      "validation_criteria": ["criterion1", "criterion2"]
    }
  ],
  "wave_plan": {
    "enabled": "boolean",
    "pattern": "Sequential | TwoParallel | ThreeParallel",
    "waves": [
      {
        "wave_id": "string",
        "phase": "int",
        "agents": ["agent1", "agent2"],
        "execution": "parallel | sequential"
      }
    ]
  },
  "domain_adjustments": {
    "frontend_adjustment": "string",
    "backend_adjustment": "string",
    "database_adjustment": "string"
  },
  "created_at": "ISO timestamp"
}

Markdown Document: Complete phase plan document saved to:

• Serena memory: phase_plan_{project_name}
• Local file: PHASE_PLAN.md (optional)

Success Criteria

This skill succeeds if:

1. ✅ Phase count is algorithmically correct

   • Complexity 0.00-0.30 → 3 phases
   • Complexity 0.30-0.50 → 3-4 phases
   • Complexity 0.50-0.70 → 5 phases
   • Complexity 0.70-0.85 → 5 phases + extended gates
   • Complexity 0.85-1.00 → 5-6 phases + risk mitigation

2. ✅ Timeline percentages sum to exactly 100%

   • No rounding errors
   • All adjustments accounted for
   • Distribution makes logical sense

3. ✅ Every phase has validation gate with >=3 criteria

   • Clear success metrics
   • Measurable outcomes
   • Verification method defined

4. ✅ Wave plan is correct for complexity >=0.5 AND multiple domains >=30%

   • Parallel waves only when justified
   • Sequential integration phase included
   • Domain-specific agent assignments

5. ✅ Plan is stored in Serena memory

   • Memory key: phase_plan_{project_name}
   • Retrievable via read_memory()
   • Contains complete phase structure

Validation:

def validate_phase_plan(plan):
    # Verify phase count algorithm
    if plan.complexity_score < 0.30:
        assert plan.phase_count == 3
    elif plan.complexity_score < 0.50:
        assert plan.phase_count in [3, 4]
    elif plan.complexity_score < 0.70:
        assert plan.phase_count == 5
    elif plan.complexity_score < 0.85:
        assert plan.phase_count == 5
    else:
        assert plan.phase_count in [5, 6]

    # Verify timeline percentages
    total_percentage = sum(phase.percentage for phase in plan.phases)
    assert abs(total_percentage - 100.0) < 0.01, "Timeline must sum to 100%"

    # Verify validation gates
    for phase in plan.phases:
        assert len(phase.validation_criteria) >= 3, "Each phase needs >=3 validation criteria"

    # Verify wave plan logic
    if plan.complexity_score >= 0.5:
        multi_domain = sum(1 for d in plan.domain_percentages.values() if d >= 30) >= 2
        if multi_domain:
            assert plan.wave_plan.enabled, "Wave plan required for complex multi-domain projects"

    # Verify Serena storage
    assert serena.memory_exists(f"phase_plan_{plan.project_name}"), "Plan must be stored in Serena"

Examples

Example 1: Simple Project (Complexity 0.25)

Input:

Complexity: 0.25
Timeline: 8 hours
Domains: Backend 70%, Frontend 30%

Output:

3-Phase Plan:

Phase 1: Setup & Core (30% - 2.4h)
- Project scaffolding
- Backend API implementation
- Basic frontend

Phase 2: Features & Testing (50% - 4h)
- Feature completion
- Integration
- Testing (NO MOCKS)

Phase 3: Deploy (20% - 1.6h)
- Deployment
- Documentation

Example 2: Complex Project (Complexity 0.65)

Input:

Complexity: 0.65
Timeline: 40 hours
Domains: Frontend 45%, Backend 35%, Database 20%

Output:

5-Phase Plan:

Phase 1: Foundation (20% - 8h)
- Environment setup
- Database schema design
- API contract definition

Phase 2: Core Implementation (35% - 14h)
Wave 2a: Frontend (parallel)
Wave 2b: Backend + DB (parallel)
Wave 2c: Integration (sequential)

Phase 3: Integration (25% - 10h)
- Service integration
- Advanced features
- Cross-component flows

Phase 4: Quality (15% - 6h)
- Comprehensive testing
- Performance optimization
- Code refinement

Phase 5: Deployment (5% - 2h)
- Staging deployment
- Documentation
- Handoff

Example 3: Critical Project (Complexity 0.92)

Input:

Complexity: 0.92
Timeline: 80 hours
Domains: Frontend 30%, Backend 40%, Database 20%, Security 10%

Output:

6-Phase Plan (5 + Risk Mitigation):

Phase 1: Foundation (25% - 20h)
- Extensive requirements analysis
- Architecture review
- Security planning
- Environment setup

Phase 2: Core Implementation (25% - 20h)
Wave 2a: Frontend (parallel)
Wave 2b: Backend (parallel)
Wave 2c: Database (parallel)
Wave 2d: Integration (sequential)

Phase 3: Integration (20% - 16h)
- Complex service integration
- Security implementation
- Advanced features

Phase 4: Quality (20% - 16h)
- Extensive testing (NO MOCKS)
- Security audit
- Performance testing
- Load testing

Phase 5: Risk Mitigation (5% - 4h)
- Vulnerability scanning
- Penetration testing
- Disaster recovery testing
- Compliance verification

Phase 6: Deployment (5% - 4h)
- Staged rollout
- Monitoring setup
- Comprehensive documentation
- Knowledge transfer

Validation Checklist

Before finalizing phase plan:

Completeness: ☐ All phases have clear objectives ☐ Timeline distribution sums to 100% ☐ Each phase has validation criteria ☐ Deliverables clearly defined ☐ Wave execution plan (if applicable)

Feasibility: ☐ Timeline matches project constraints ☐ Resource allocation realistic ☐ Dependencies properly sequenced ☐ Parallel work properly identified ☐ Risk mitigations adequate

Integration: ☐ Compatible with spec analysis ☐ Aligns with 8D assessment ☐ Matches complexity score ☐ Wave plan matches domain breakdown ☐ Stored in Serena memory

Integration Points

With Other Skills

spec-analysis → phase-planning:

Input: Complexity score, domain breakdown
Usage: Determines phase count and distribution

phase-planning → wave-orchestration:

Output: Wave execution plan for Phase 2/3
Usage: Parallel execution coordination

phase-planning → context-preservation:

Action: Store phase plan in Serena
Usage: Cross-session persistence

With Core Patterns

PHASE_PLANNING.md:

Reference: Detailed 5-phase framework
Usage: Complete methodology and examples

WAVE_ORCHESTRATION.md:

Coordination: Wave execution within phases
Usage: Parallel implementation patterns

TESTING_PHILOSOPHY.md:

Constraint: NO MOCKS in Phase 4
Usage: Test planning requirements

Common Patterns

Pattern 1: Simple Script

Complexity: < 0.3
Phases: 3
Wave: Sequential
Timeline: < 1 day

Focus: Rapid iteration, minimal overhead

Pattern 2: Standard Application

Complexity: 0.3-0.7
Phases: 4-5
Wave: Parallel (Frontend/Backend)
Timeline: 1-5 days

Focus: Structured progression, quality gates

Pattern 3: Critical System

Complexity: > 0.85
Phases: 5-6
Wave: Parallel + Sequential integration
Timeline: > 5 days

Focus: Rigorous validation, risk mitigation

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

❌ Phase Skipping: Never skip validation gates ❌ Premature Optimization: Don't over-engineer simple projects ❌ Under-Planning: Don't under-estimate critical systems ❌ Ignoring Complexity: Always use complexity score ❌ Fixed Templates: Always adapt to project needs

Performance Benchmarks

Expected Performance (measured on Claude Sonnet 3.5):

Complexity	Phase Count	Planning Time	Adjustment Calculations	Total Time
0.00-0.30 (Simple)	3 phases	2-4 minutes	1 adjustment	3-5 min
0.30-0.50 (Moderate)	3-4 phases	4-6 minutes	2 adjustments	5-8 min
0.50-0.70 (Complex)	5 phases	6-10 minutes	3 adjustments + wave plan	10-15 min
0.70-0.85 (High)	5 phases + gates	10-15 minutes	4 adjustments + risk	15-20 min
0.85-1.00 (Critical)	5-6 phases + risk	15-25 minutes	5+ adjustments + extensive risk	25-35 min

Performance Indicators:

• ✅ Fast: <10 minutes for typical projects (complexity <0.60)
• ⚠️ Acceptable: 10-20 minutes for complex projects (0.60-0.85)
• 🔴 Slow: >25 minutes (check: is complexity >0.85? Are extensive risk mitigations needed?)

Quality Validation:

• Timeline percentages sum to exactly 100.0% (±0.01% tolerance)
• Each phase has >=3 validation criteria
• Wave plan enabled for complexity >=0.50 AND multiple domains >=30%

---

Complete Execution Walkthrough

Scenario: Generate phase plan for a moderate complexity full-stack project

Input:

{
  "spec_analysis": {
    "complexity_score": 0.48,
    "interpretation": "Moderate",
    "domain_percentages": {
      "Frontend": 45,
      "Backend": 35,
      "Database": 20
    },
    "timeline_estimate": "32 hours"
  },
  "project_name": "customer_portal"
}

Execution Process (showing actual calculations):

Step 1: Load Context

Inputs loaded:
- Complexity: 0.48 (MODERATE)
- Timeline: 32 hours
- Domains: Frontend 45%, Backend 35%, Database 20%
- Project: customer_portal

Step 2: Determine Phase Count

complexity = 0.48

if complexity < 0.30:
    phase_count = 3  # Simple
elif complexity < 0.50:  # ← MATCHES (0.48 < 0.50)
    phase_count = 4  # Moderate (flexible 3-4, using 4 for better structure)
elif complexity < 0.70:
    phase_count = 5  # Complex
# ...

Result: phase_count = 4

Step 3: Calculate Timeline Distribution

Step 3a: Start with base percentages (4-phase template for Moderate)

Base 4-Phase Distribution:
Phase 1 (Setup):          20%
Phase 2 (Implementation): 45%
Phase 3 (Testing):        25%
Phase 4 (Deploy):         10%
Total:                    100% ✅

Step 3b: Apply Complexity Adjustments (Moderate: 0.30-0.50)

Moderate adjustments (lines 315-319 don't apply to Moderate, so no complexity adjustments)

After complexity adjustments:
Phase 1: 20% (no change)
Phase 2: 45% (no change)
Phase 3: 25% (no change)
Phase 4: 10% (no change)
Total: 100% ✅

Step 3c: Apply Domain Adjustments (Frontend-Heavy: 45% < 50%, so no domain-heavy adjustments)

No domain adjustments apply (Frontend 45% < 50% threshold, Backend 35% < 50%, Database 20% < 30%)

Final percentages:
Phase 1: 20%
Phase 2: 45%
Phase 3: 25%
Phase 4: 10%
Total: 100% ✅

Step 3d: Calculate Absolute Times

Total timeline: 32 hours

Phase 1: 32 × 0.20 = 6.4 hours
Phase 2: 32 × 0.45 = 14.4 hours
Phase 3: 32 × 0.25 = 8.0 hours
Phase 4: 32 × 0.10 = 3.2 hours
Total: 32.0 hours ✅

Step 4: Define Validation Gates

Phase 1 → Phase 2 Gate (Foundation complete):

Criteria:
☐ Environment setup complete (dev tools installed, repos created)
☐ Database schema designed (ERD complete, tables defined)
☐ API contracts defined (endpoints documented, request/response schemas)
☐ Technical stack validated (React/Node.js/PostgreSQL confirmed)
☐ No blocking unknowns (all tech decisions made)

Verification:
- Run: npm install && npm run dev (dev environment starts successfully)
- Check: Database schema file exists with >=5 tables defined
- Check: API specification document complete (all endpoints documented)

Phase 2 → Phase 3 Gate (Implementation complete):

Criteria:
☐ All core features implemented (customer login, data display, CRUD operations)
☐ Frontend components functional (all UI screens render correctly)
☐ Backend endpoints operational (all API routes return 200/201 on valid requests)
☐ Database migrations applied (all tables created, seed data loaded)
☐ No critical bugs (application runs without crashes)

Verification:
- Run: npm test (all unit tests passing)
- Check: Manual testing of each feature (login → view data → create record → success)
- Check: Database query test (SELECT * FROM customers returns results)

Phase 3 → Phase 4 Gate (Testing complete):

Criteria:
☐ All functional tests passing (Puppeteer tests for Frontend, real HTTP for Backend, real DB)
☐ Integration tests passing (Frontend ↔ Backend ↔ Database flows validated)
☐ NO MOCKS compliance verified (all tests use real browser, real HTTP, real database)
☐ Test coverage >= 80% (code coverage report generated)
☐ Performance acceptable (page loads <2s, API responds <500ms)

Verification:
- Run: npm run test:functional (all Puppeteer tests pass)
- Run: npm run test:integration (all service integration tests pass)
- Check: No mock libraries in dependencies (verify package.json)
- Run: npm run coverage (verify >=80%)

Phase 4 → Complete Gate (Deployment ready):

Criteria:
☐ Deployed to staging environment (accessible URL, application loads)
☐ Smoke tests passing (critical user flows work on staging)
☐ Documentation complete (README, API docs, deployment guide)
☐ Deployment runbook validated (tested deployment process from scratch)
☐ Production-ready (security review passed, performance validated)

Verification:
- Access: https://staging.customer-portal.com (loads successfully)
- Run: smoke test suite on staging (all critical flows pass)
- Check: docs/ directory has README.md, API.md, DEPLOY.md
- Test: Follow deployment runbook on clean environment (succeeds)

Step 5: Create Wave Mapping

# Check wave plan requirements
complexity >= 0.5?  # 0.48 < 0.5 → NO
multi_domain = count(d for d in domains if d >= 30)  # Frontend 45%, Backend 35% → 2 domains
multi_domain >= 2?  # YES

# Decision: Optional wave plan (not mandatory for 0.48, but beneficial for 2 domains >=30%)

# Since complexity < 0.50, wave plan is OPTIONAL
# For this example, we'll use sequential execution
wave_plan = {
  "enabled": False,
  "pattern": "Sequential",
  "rationale": "Complexity 0.48 < 0.50 threshold for mandatory waves"
}

Step 6: Generate Phase Plan Document

# Implementation Plan: Customer Portal

## Executive Summary
- **Complexity Score**: 0.48 / 1.0 (MODERATE)
- **Phase Count**: 4 phases
- **Total Timeline**: 32 hours (2-3 days)
- **Parallelization**: Sequential (complexity < 0.50)

## Phase Breakdown

### Phase 1: Foundation & Setup (20% - 6.4 hours)
**Objectives**:
- Environment configuration
- Database schema design
- API contract definition

**Key Activities**:
1. Set up development environment (30%)
2. Design database schema (40%)
3. Define API contracts (30%)

**Deliverables**:
- Development environment running
- Database ERD and schema file
- API specification document

**Validation Gate**:
☐ Environment setup complete
☐ Database schema designed
☐ API contracts defined
☐ Technical stack validated
☐ No blocking unknowns

**Estimated Duration**: 6.4 hours

### Phase 2: Implementation (45% - 14.4 hours)
[Similar structure for Phases 2-4...]

Step 7: Store in Serena Memory

write_memory("phase_plan_customer_portal", {
  project_name: "customer_portal",
  complexity_score: 0.48,
  phase_count: 4,
  total_timeline: "32 hours",
  interpretation_band: "Moderate",
  phases: [
    {number: 1, name: "Foundation & Setup", percentage: 20, duration: "6.4 hours", ...},
    {number: 2, name: "Implementation", percentage: 45, duration: "14.4 hours", ...},
    {number: 3, name: "Testing", percentage: 25, duration: "8.0 hours", ...},
    {number: 4, name: "Deployment", percentage: 10, duration: "3.2 hours", ...}
  ],
  wave_plan: {enabled: false, pattern: "Sequential"},
  created_at: "2025-11-08T20:15:00Z"
})

// Verify
const verify = read_memory("phase_plan_customer_portal")
if (!verify) throw Error("Serena save failed")

Validation

✅ Phase count: 4 (correct for complexity 0.48 ∈ [0.30, 0.50])
✅ Timeline percentages: 20 + 45 + 25 + 10 = 100%
✅ Each phase has >=3 validation criteria (5, 5, 5, 5 respectively)
✅ Wave plan logic: Enabled=false (correct for 0.48 < 0.50)
✅ Serena storage: phase_plan_customer_portal saved

Quality Score: 1.0 (5/5 checks passed)

---

This walkthrough demonstrates the complete phase planning process, showing:

1. How to determine phase count from complexity
2. How to calculate timeline distribution with adjustments
3. How percentage adjustments work (additive: 15% + 5% = 20%)
4. How to ensure percentages sum to 100%
5. When to enable wave plans (complexity >=0.50 AND multi-domain)

Key Clarification: All percentage adjustments are ADDITIVE (e.g., "+5%" means add 5 percentage points to the base value, not multiply). This ensures percentages always sum to 100% when adjustments are balanced.

---

References

• PHASE_PLANNING.md: Complete 5-phase methodology (1562 lines)
• 5-phase-examples.md: Detailed examples (3 scenarios)
• phase-template.md: Reusable phase structure
• validation-gate.md: Gate criteria templates

---

Version: 1.0.0 Last Updated: 2025-11-03 Shannon Version: 4.0.0+