Notre avis
Exécute des plans d'implémentation avec revue en deux étapes, vérification et points de contrôle par lots.
Points forts
- Approche systématique pour exécuter des tâches multiples
- Revue en deux étapes (conformité puis qualité) avant validation
- Points de contrôle réguliers pour obtenir un feedback utilisateur
- Exécution parallèle possible via des sous-agents
Limites
- Nécessite un plan bien défini dans docs/plans/
- Peut être lent pour des plans très volumineux sans parallélisation manuelle
- Dépend de la capacité à exécuter des vérifications (tests, lint, build)
Utilisez cette compétence lorsque vous travaillez avec un plan d'implémentation structuré et que vous devez exécuter plusieurs tâches de manière fiable.
Évitez de l'utiliser pour des modifications simples ou ad-hoc qui ne nécessitent pas de plan formel.
Analyse de sécurité
SûrThis skill defines a systematic workflow for executing implementation plans using an AI agent's own toolset (Task, subagents) and does not instruct or perform any destructive, exfiltrating, or external command execution. It focuses on verification, review, and checkpointing with no security risks.
Aucun point d'attention détecté
Exemples
Execute task 3 from docs/plans/database-migration.mdRun the next 3 independent tasks from the plan and wait for my feedbackExecute the entire plan at docs/plans/feature-auth.md step by step, reporting after each taskname: plan-executor description: Execute implementation plans created by /discover. Use this skill when working in a worktree with a --plan flag, when you need to execute tasks from a docs/plans/*.md file, or when implementing a multi-task feature systematically.
Plan Executor
Execute implementation plans with two-stage review, verification, and batch checkpoints.
When This Skill Applies
This skill automatically applies when:
- You're in a worktree created with
--planflag - Your goal references a plan file at
docs/plans/... - You're executing a multi-task implementation
Core Principles
- Evidence before claims - Never claim completion without verification output
- Two-stage review - Spec compliance first, then code quality
- Batch execution - Execute 3 tasks, checkpoint, continue
- Fresh context per task - For parallel execution, use separate subagents
Execution Flow
Phase 1: Load and Review Plan
1. Read the plan file completely
2. Extract all tasks with their:
- Files to create/modify
- Steps to follow
- Verification commands
- Dependencies
3. Create mental model of dependency graph
4. Identify independent vs dependent tasks
5. If concerns about the plan, raise with user BEFORE starting
Phase 2: Execute Tasks
For 1-3 tasks: Execute sequentially yourself For 4+ independent tasks: Consider parallel subagents
Per Task Execution
1. Mark task as in_progress (use TaskUpdate)
2. Follow each step exactly as written
3. Run verification commands, capture output
4. Perform two-stage review (see below)
5. Mark task as completed only with evidence
6. Commit the work
Phase 3: Batch Checkpoints
After every 3 tasks (or all independent tasks):
Report to user:
- Tasks completed with evidence
- Issues encountered
- "Ready for feedback"
Wait for user confirmation before continuing.
Phase 4: Dependent Tasks
After independent tasks complete:
- Identify newly unblocked tasks
- Execute next batch
- Repeat until all tasks done
Two-Stage Review
Stage 1: Spec Compliance Review
Question: Does the code match the plan exactly?
Check:
- [ ] All required files created at exact paths
- [ ] All modifications match spec
- [ ] Nothing missing from requirements
- [ ] Nothing extra added (YAGNI)
- [ ] Tests cover specified behaviors
If issues found:
- Fix the gaps
- Re-review
- Don't proceed until spec-compliant
Stage 2: Code Quality Review
Question: Is the implementation well-built?
Check:
- [ ] Code follows project patterns
- [ ] Tests are meaningful (not just coverage)
- [ ] No obvious bugs or edge cases missed
- [ ] Error handling appropriate
- [ ] No code smells
If issues found:
- Fix the issues
- Re-review
- Don't proceed until quality approved
Verification Before Completion
The Iron Law
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE
Required Evidence
| Claim | Required Evidence |
| ---------------- | -------------------------------- |
| "Tests pass" | Actual test output: X/Y pass |
| "Build succeeds" | Build output: exit code 0 |
| "Linter clean" | Linter output: 0 errors |
| "Task complete" | All verification commands output |
Bad vs Good
❌ BAD: "The tests should pass now"
❌ BAD: "I believe this is working"
❌ BAD: "Task completed successfully"
✅ GOOD: "Tests pass (output: 12/12 pass, 0 failures)"
✅ GOOD: "Build succeeded (exit code 0, no errors)"
✅ GOOD: "Task complete. Evidence:
- Tests: 12/12 pass
- Lint: 0 errors
- Build: success"
When to Verify
- Before claiming any task is done
- Before moving to next task
- Before reporting to user
- Before committing
Parallel Execution with Subagents
When you have 4+ independent tasks, use parallel subagents:
Launching Subagents
// Launch multiple Task tools in a SINGLE message
Task({
description: 'Implement Task 1',
prompt: `You are implementing Task 1 from the plan.
Task details:
${task1Content}
Requirements:
1. Follow each step exactly
2. Run all verification commands
3. Report actual output, not assumptions
4. Commit when complete
When done, report:
- Files created/modified
- Verification output (actual)
- Any issues encountered`,
subagent_type: 'general-purpose',
});
// In the SAME message, launch Task 2, 3, etc.
Collecting Results
After subagents complete:
- Review each result
- Verify the evidence provided
- If subagent claimed success without evidence, re-verify yourself
- Report consolidated results to user
Don't Trust Blindly
❌ Subagent: "Task completed successfully"
You: "Great, moving on"
✅ Subagent: "Task completed. Tests: 5/5 pass"
You: [Verify the claim by running tests yourself if suspicious]
You: "Confirmed, Task 1 complete with 5/5 tests passing"
When to Stop and Ask
STOP immediately when:
- Verification fails repeatedly
- Plan has gaps or unclear instructions
- Dependencies aren't actually met
- You're unsure about an approach
Don't:
- Guess when confused
- Force through blockers
- Skip verification
- Proceed with failing tests
Example Execution
Agent: I'm executing the plan at docs/plans/2026-02-01-webhooks.md
[Reads plan, extracts 5 tasks]
Task 1 (independent): WebhookConfig model
Task 2 (independent): WebhookDelivery service
Task 3 (independent): API endpoints
Task 4 (depends on 1,2): Integration
Task 5 (depends on 4): E2E tests
Starting with independent tasks 1-3...
---
Task 1: WebhookConfig model
[Following steps from plan]
1. Writing failing test...
2. Running: pnpm test packages/core --grep WebhookConfig
Output: FAIL - WebhookConfig is not defined
3. Creating model...
4. Running: pnpm test packages/core --grep WebhookConfig
Output: PASS - 3/3 tests pass
Spec compliance review:
✅ All files created at specified paths
✅ Model matches spec
✅ Tests cover required behaviors
✅ Nothing extra added
Code quality review:
✅ Follows project patterns
✅ Tests are meaningful
✅ No obvious issues
Task 1 complete.
Evidence: Tests pass (3/3), files created at packages/core/src/models/webhook-config.ts
[Commit: "feat: add WebhookConfig model"]
---
[Similar for Tasks 2, 3]
---
Batch checkpoint: Tasks 1-3 complete
Summary:
- Task 1: WebhookConfig model ✅ (3/3 tests)
- Task 2: WebhookDelivery service ✅ (5/5 tests)
- Task 3: API endpoints ✅ (4/4 tests)
All independent tasks verified and committed.
Ready for feedback. Should I proceed with Task 4 (Integration)?
Integration with Workflow
/discover (main branch)
│
├── Creates plan at docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-feature.md
│
└── Creates worktree with --plan flag
│
└── plan-executor (this skill)
│
├── Execute tasks with verification
├── Two-stage review
├── Batch checkpoints
│
└── Complete with evidence
Anti-Patterns
Don't:
- Claim completion without running verification
- Trust subagent "success" reports blindly
- Skip spec compliance review
- Move to next task with failing tests
- Guess when plan is unclear
- Add features not in the plan (YAGNI)
Do:
- Run every verification command
- Capture and report actual output
- Stop when blocked
- Ask for clarification when needed
- Follow the plan exactly
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.