name: incremental-implementation description: Comprehensive guide for implementing code incrementally following established patterns, conventions, and quality standards languages: [python, typescript, javascript, go, rust, java, csharp, php, ruby] subagents: [code/feature, code/bug-fix, code/refactor] tools_needed: [edit, write, read]
Instructions
When implementing features or changes, follow this incremental, quality-focused approach:
Step 1: Follow Core Conventions Exactly
Purpose: Maintain codebase consistency and avoid introducing technical debt.
How:
- Read
core-conventions.md(or equivalent project conventions) before starting - Check language-specific conventions (Python, TypeScript, etc.)
- Follow established patterns for:
- Naming (variables, functions, classes, files)
- Error handling (throw vs return, typed errors)
- Imports (ordering, absolute vs relative)
- Testing (framework, coverage, structure)
- Database (ORM, migrations, queries)
Why this matters:
- Inconsistent code confuses maintainers
- Deviations from conventions create review friction
- Following patterns reduces cognitive load when reading code
Example:
# ✅ Good - follows Python conventions
def calculate_total_price(items: list[Item]) -> Decimal:
"""Calculate total price including tax."""
subtotal = sum(item.price for item in items)
return subtotal * Decimal("1.08") # 8% tax
# ❌ Bad - violates conventions
def calcTotalPrice(items): # camelCase (wrong for Python), no types
sub = 0 # unclear variable name
for i in items:
sub = sub + i.price # verbose when comprehension works
return sub * 1.08 # magic number, float instead of Decimal
Step 2: Match Existing Patterns in the Same Layer
Purpose: Keep similar code similar; don't introduce new patterns without reason.
How:
- Read 2-3 existing files in the same layer before writing new code
- Same layer = same part of architecture (e.g., all API routes, all services, all models)
- Identify patterns:
- How are functions/classes organized?
- How are dependencies injected?
- How are errors handled?
- What naming patterns are used?
- Copy patterns, don't invent:
- If existing routes use
@router.get("/resource"), use that - If existing services use constructor injection, use that
- If existing models use
created_at/updated_at, use that
- If existing routes use
Why this matters:
- Consistency makes code easier to navigate
- New patterns increase maintenance burden
- Patterns embody past decisions and domain knowledge
Example:
If existing API routes look like this:
# Existing pattern in routes/user_routes.py
@router.get("/users/{user_id}")
async def get_user(
user_id: str,
user_service: UserService = Depends(get_user_service),
) -> UserResponse:
user = await user_service.get_by_id(user_id)
if not user:
raise HTTPException(status_code=404, detail="User not found")
return UserResponse.from_model(user)
Then new routes should match:
# ✅ Good - matches existing pattern
@router.get("/orders/{order_id}")
async def get_order(
order_id: str,
order_service: OrderService = Depends(get_order_service),
) -> OrderResponse:
order = await order_service.get_by_id(order_id)
if not order:
raise HTTPException(status_code=404, detail="Order not found")
return OrderResponse.from_model(order)
# ❌ Bad - introduces new pattern without justification
@router.route("/orders/<order_id>", methods=["GET"]) # Different decorator style
def get_order_sync(order_id): # Not async when others are
service = OrderService() # Direct instantiation, not dependency injection
result = service.find(order_id) # Different method name (find vs get_by_id)
return jsonify(result) # Different response pattern
Step 3: Add Inline Comments for Non-Obvious Logic
Purpose: Explain the WHY, not the WHAT. Help future readers (including yourself) understand intent.
When to add comments:
- ✅ Complex algorithms - explain the approach
- ✅ Magic numbers - explain what they represent
- ✅ Workarounds - explain why the workaround is needed
- ✅ Invariants - explain assumptions callers must maintain
- ✅ Performance optimizations - explain why optimization is needed
- ✅ External dependencies - explain API quirks or limitations
When NOT to add comments:
- ❌ Restating what the code does (redundant)
- ❌ Explaining obvious standard library functions
- ❌ Translating code to English line-by-line
Examples:
# ✅ Good comments (explain WHY)
# Use exponential backoff to avoid overwhelming the API during rate limit recovery
for attempt in range(max_retries):
delay = 2 ** attempt # 1s, 2s, 4s, 8s, 16s
await asyncio.sleep(delay)
# 86400 = seconds in a day (cache expires daily at midnight)
cache_ttl = 86400
# Intentionally not awaited - fire and forget analytics event
asyncio.create_task(track_user_action(user_id, "login"))
# WORKAROUND: API returns 200 with error in body instead of 4xx/5xx
# Remove this check when API v2 is deployed (see JIRA-1234)
if response.status == 200 and "error" in response.json():
raise APIError(response.json()["error"])
# ❌ Bad comments (restate code)
# Get user by ID
user = await user_service.get_by_id(user_id)
# Check if user is None
if user is None:
# Raise 404 error
raise HTTPException(status_code=404)
# Return user response
return UserResponse.from_model(user)
Step 4: Add TODO Comments for Judgment Calls
Purpose: Flag decisions that need user review or future attention.
When to add TODOs:
- ✅ Temporary workarounds - "This will break if X happens"
- ✅ Incomplete implementations - "Add validation for edge case Y"
- ✅ Performance concerns - "This is O(n²), optimize if dataset grows"
- ✅ Missing error handling - "Handle timeout case"
- ✅ Unclear requirements - "Confirm with user if this behavior is correct"
- ✅ Technical debt - "Refactor to use repository pattern"
Format:
# TODO: [Category] Description (Owner, Date)
# TODO: Performance - Cache this query result (Alice, 2026-04-10)
# TODO: Security - Add rate limiting to this endpoint (Bob, 2026-04-10)
# TODO: Validation - Handle case where email is None (Charlie, 2026-04-10)
Categories:
TODO: Incomplete- Feature not fully implementedTODO: Bug- Known issue to fixTODO: Performance- Optimization neededTODO: Security- Security concernTODO: Refactor- Code quality improvementTODO: Validation- Missing input validationTODO: Testing- Missing test coverageTODO: Documentation- Missing docs
Examples:
def process_payment(amount: Decimal, card_token: str) -> PaymentResult:
# TODO: Security - Add fraud detection check before processing (Alice, 2026-04-10)
# TODO: Performance - This calls payment API synchronously; make async (Bob, 2026-04-10)
result = payment_gateway.charge(amount, card_token)
# TODO: Incomplete - Handle gateway timeout (returns None currently) (Charlie, 2026-04-10)
if result is None:
return PaymentResult(status="failed", error="Gateway error")
return result
Step 5: Implement One File at a Time
Purpose: Reduce context switching, make reviews easier, minimize merge conflicts.
How:
- Complete one file fully before moving to the next
- Write the implementation
- Add inline comments
- Add TODOs if needed
- Verify it compiles/passes type checks
- Commit frequently (optional, but recommended)
- One commit per file or logical change
- Makes rollback easier if needed
- Don't jump between files during implementation
- Finish what you started
- Reduces mental context switching
Why this matters:
- Easier to review: Reviewers can focus on one file at a time
- Fewer merge conflicts: Changes are localized
- Better focus: Less context switching improves code quality
- Easier rollback: If one file has issues, only that file needs rework
Anti-pattern:
# ❌ Bad - jumping between files
1. Start implementing user_service.py
2. Realize you need UserRepository, switch to user_repository.py
3. Realize repository needs User model, switch to models.py
4. Go back to user_service.py, half-implement
5. Switch to user_routes.py to add API endpoint
6. Back to user_service.py to finish
Good pattern:
# ✅ Good - one file at a time
1. Implement models.py (User model) - COMPLETE
2. Implement user_repository.py (UserRepository) - COMPLETE
3. Implement user_service.py (UserService) - COMPLETE
4. Implement user_routes.py (API routes) - COMPLETE
5. Implement tests/test_user_service.py - COMPLETE
Common Mistakes
❌ Mistake 1: Ignoring Existing Patterns
Problem: Introducing a new pattern when an existing one works.
Example:
# Existing pattern (constructor injection)
class UserService:
def __init__(self, repo: UserRepository):
self.repo = repo
# ❌ New code introduces different pattern (property injection)
class OrderService:
@property
def repo(self) -> OrderRepository:
return get_repository() # Global lookup instead of injection
Fix: Match the existing pattern (constructor injection).
❌ Mistake 2: Over-Commenting
Problem: Commenting what the code already says.
Example:
# ❌ Bad
# Loop through items
for item in items:
# Add item price to total
total += item.price
# ✅ Good (no comment needed - code is self-explanatory)
for item in items:
total += item.price
# ✅ Good (comment explains WHY, not WHAT)
# Sum prices excluding items marked as promotional (they're free)
for item in items:
if not item.is_promotional:
total += item.price
❌ Mistake 3: Implementing Multiple Files in Parallel
Problem: Jumping between files before completing any.
Why it's bad:
- Half-finished files are harder to review
- Increases merge conflict risk
- Harder to track progress
- More mental context switching
Fix: Finish one file completely before starting the next.
❌ Mistake 4: Not Reading Existing Code First
Problem: Writing code without understanding existing patterns.
Example:
- Writing sync code in an async codebase
- Using different error handling than the rest of the codebase
- Naming variables differently than existing conventions
Fix: Read 2-3 similar files before writing new code.
❌ Mistake 5: TODOs Without Context
Problem: Writing vague TODOs that don't explain what needs to be done.
Bad:
# TODO: fix this
# TODO: improve
# TODO: check
Good:
# TODO: Performance - Cache this query result to avoid N+1 problem (Alice, 2026-04-10)
# TODO: Security - Add rate limiting to prevent brute force (Bob, 2026-04-10)
# TODO: Validation - Check that email is not already registered (Charlie, 2026-04-10)
Examples
Example 1: Implementing a New Service
Context: Adding OrderService to an existing codebase
Step 1: Read existing services
# Read 2-3 existing services to understand patterns
cat services/user_service.py
cat services/product_service.py
cat services/payment_service.py
Step 2: Match pattern
# ✅ Good - matches existing pattern
class OrderService:
"""Service for managing orders."""
def __init__(self, repo: OrderRepository):
"""Initialize with repository dependency."""
self.repo = repo
async def create_order(self, user_id: str, items: list[OrderItem]) -> Order:
"""Create new order for user.
Args:
user_id: ID of user placing order
items: List of items in order
Returns:
Created order
Raises:
ValidationError: If items list is empty
UserNotFoundError: If user doesn't exist
"""
if not items:
raise ValidationError("Order must have at least one item")
# TODO: Validation - Check that all items are in stock (Alice, 2026-04-10)
# Calculate total (excluding promotional items per business rules)
total = sum(item.price for item in items if not item.is_promotional)
order = Order(
user_id=user_id,
items=items,
total=total,
status=OrderStatus.PENDING,
)
return await self.repo.create(order)
Example 2: Adding Inline Comments
Without comments (unclear intent):
def calculate_discount(price: Decimal, user: User) -> Decimal:
if user.created_at < datetime.now() - timedelta(days=365):
return price * Decimal("0.9")
return price
With good comments (intent is clear):
def calculate_discount(price: Decimal, user: User) -> Decimal:
"""Apply loyalty discount for long-term users.
Users who joined > 1 year ago get 10% discount as loyalty reward.
This is a business requirement from Product (see PRD-2024-Q3-05).
"""
one_year_ago = datetime.now() - timedelta(days=365)
if user.created_at < one_year_ago:
return price * Decimal("0.9") # 10% discount
return price
Summary
Key Principles:
- Consistency over cleverness - Match existing patterns
- Explain why, not what - Comment intent, not implementation
- One thing at a time - Complete files before moving on
- Flag uncertainties - Use TODOs for judgment calls
- Read before writing - Understand context first
Benefits:
- Easier code reviews
- Fewer merge conflicts
- Better maintainability
- Higher code quality
- Reduced cognitive load
Next Steps:
- After implementing, use
post-implementation-checklistskill - Before implementing, use
feature-planningskill
Expert Next.js App Router
Developpement
Un skill qui transforme Claude en expert Next.js App Router.
Générateur de README
Developpement
Crée des README.md professionnels et complets pour vos projets.
Rédacteur de Documentation API
Developpement
Génère de la documentation API complète au format OpenAPI/Swagger.