From techne
Interrogates engineering briefs before work starts, surfacing gaps, weak claims, and contradictions, then produces an intent-level plan.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/techne:anchor-intakeThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Force the skipped move before execution: interrogate the written brief against a
Force the skipped move before execution: interrogate the written brief against a fixed engineering implementation rubric, then plan only after gaps and weak assumptions are visible.
Use this skill when the user provides a substantial written engineering implementation brief: a ticket, PRD, design note, or task brief with enough text to interrogate before work starts.
Do not use it for a bare one-line request, an already precise command, a
marketing brief, research proposal, prose draft, code diff review, bug fix, or
implementation execution. For unsupported or too-thin artifacts, self-eject in
one sentence and write no .techne/plan/<slug> output. If a captured artifact
later proves unsupported, use finalize --unscopable --reason ....
Boundary test: can you point to a user-authored written artifact and ask whether
it names the engineering goal, users, measurable success threshold, scope,
non-goals, inputs, data sources, dependencies, constraints, and acceptance
method? If yes, use anchor-intake. If no, eject or ask for the brief first.
python3 skills/anchor-intake/scripts/intake_gate.py init --project <root> --plan <slug> --brief-file <path>..techne/plan/<slug>/intake.json:
present with citation and valueItems, present-weak with citation and a
dependent question, or gap with a question or visible modelDefault.solution-as-goal and
contradiction findings whenever the brief implies them. Contradictions need
two verified spans.planDelta. Weak/gap questions must reference the weak
span/value or the missing element label.id, dependsOnAssumptions, dependsOnSteps, verifiableOutcome, and at
least one terminal step reachable from a root step.python3 skills/anchor-intake/scripts/intake_gate.py check --project <root> --plan <slug>.
Fix structural failures by doing the missing intake work, not by padding JSON.python3 skills/anchor-intake/scripts/intake_gate.py finalize --project <root> --plan <slug>.
Relay the generated intakeReport.json to the user, especially gaps, weak
elements, questions, solution-as-goal findings, contradictions, and warnings.Artifacts are written under the target project:
.techne/plan/<slug>/
brief.txt # captured external artifact
context.json # computed by init
intake.json # authored by the reviewer/planner
report.json # computed by check
plan.json # computed by finalize
intakeReport.json # computed by finalize
Generated .techne/ output belongs to target projects. Do not commit it to this
repository.
Minimal intake.json shape:
{
"schema": "techne.intake/1",
"elements": {
"data-sources": {
"disposition": "gap",
"questionIds": ["Q1"]
}
},
"findings": [
{
"id": "S1",
"kind": "solution-as-goal",
"citation": {"offset": 16, "quote": "Build a Slack bot"}
}
],
"questions": [
{
"id": "Q1",
"text": "Which data sources should the implementation read?",
"resolves": ["data-sources"],
"planDelta": {"adds": ["Bind implementation to the named source"]}
}
],
"steps": [
{
"id": "s1",
"title": "Implement only the scoped behavior",
"dependsOnAssumptions": ["goal-and-why"],
"dependsOnSteps": [],
"verifiableOutcome": "The scoped behavior can be verified by the acceptance method",
"terminal": true
}
]
}
Use reference.md for the full JSON contract, fixed rubric, STOPLIST/RUBRIC-LABEL set, shape rules, warning semantics, and known weak spots.
finalize if check reports blocking failures.--unscopable --reason if the artifact is not an engineering
implementation brief or is too garbled/thin to interrogate honestly.anchor-intake ends at a surfaced report and
intent-level plan; implementation belongs to the next workflow step.npx claudepluginhub lynxlangya/techne --plugin techneGuides creation and stress-testing of implementation plans through two modes: Create mode asks targeted questions to uncover blindspots, then writes a plan; Review mode scores six dimensions to 5/5 with claim verification.
Generates structured implementation plans from feature descriptions or requirements, grounded in repo patterns and research. Deepens existing plans via interactive sub-agent review.
Generates tightly scoped implementation plans (≤5 steps, ≤1250 words) for tasks, framed as staff engineer discussions. Use for sprint-ready breakdowns.