Story Planning - TDD Implementation Plan Generator

Story Planning - TDD Implementation Plan Generator

Generate test-driven implementation plans for approved stories.

Announce: On activation, say: "I'm using the story-planning skill to create the implementation plan."

Database: .claude/​data/​story-tree.db Plans: .claude/​data/​plans/

Critical: Use Python sqlite3 module, NOT sqlite3 CLI.

Design Principles

• Task Granularity: Each task = 2-5 minutes of focused work
• Zero Context: Assume implementer knows nothing about the codebase
• Self-Contained: Every task has exact file paths, complete code, exact commands
• TDD Discipline: RED (write failing test) → verify failure → GREEN (minimal impl) → verify pass → COMMIT
• DRY/​YAGNI: No speculative abstractions, no premature optimization
• Frequent Commits: One commit per passing test cycle

Mode Detection

CI Mode activates when:

• Environment variable CI=true is set, OR
• Trigger phrase includes "(ci)" like "plan story (ci)"

CI Mode behavior:

• No confirmation prompts - use reasonable defaults
• Compact plan template (shorter explanations)
• Skip execution handoff options
• Structured summary output
• Linux paths: source venv/​bin/​activate, forward slashes

Interactive Mode (default):

• Pause for confirmation at key decisions
• Verbose plan template with full explanations
• Present execution handoff options
• Windows paths: venv\Scripts\activate, backslashes

Workflow

Step 1: Query Approved Stories

python -c "
import sqlite3, json
conn = sqlite3.connect('.claude/​data/​story-tree.db')
conn.row_factory = sqlite3.Row
stories = [dict(row) for row in conn.execute('''
    SELECT s.id, s.title, s.description, s.notes, s.project_path,
        (SELECT MIN(depth) FROM story_paths WHERE descendant_id = s.id) as node_depth,
        (SELECT GROUP_CONCAT(ancestor_id) FROM story_paths
         WHERE descendant_id = s.id AND depth > 0) as ancestors,
        (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM story_paths WHERE ancestor_id = s.id AND depth = 1) as child_count
    FROM story_nodes s
    WHERE s.stage = 'approved' AND s.hold_reason IS NULL AND s.disposition IS NULL
    ORDER BY node_depth ASC
''').fetchall()]
print(json.dumps(stories, indent=2))
conn.close()
"

Step 2: Check Dependencies & Score

Blocker keywords: "requires", "depends on", "after", "needs", "once X is done"

Scoring formula:

score = min(depth, 5) * 0.30 \
      + (1 if description else 0) * 0.25 \
      + (10 - min(len(criteria), 10)) / 10 * 0.20 \
      + (1 if not blocked else 0) * 0.25

Tie-breaker: Shallower depth -> shorter title -> alphabetical ID

Step 3: Select Story

• If user specified ID: validate exists and stage = 'approved' with no hold_reason/​disposition
• Otherwise: select highest-scoring non-blocked story
• Interactive only: Confirm selection with user before proceeding

Step 4: Research Codebase

Goal: Gather enough context to write a zero-context plan.

1. Read the story - full description, notes, acceptance criteria
2. Locate affected files - use project_path field or search by keywords
3. Study existing patterns - how do sibling features implement similar behavior?
4. Check technical docs - ai_docs/​technical-reference.md for conventions
5. Understand test patterns - review existing tests in tests/ for style

Code Landmarks (for targeted reads):

• src/​syncopaid/​tracker.py:88-130 - ActivityEvent dataclass
• src/​syncopaid/​tracker.py:204-260 - TrackerLoop init
• src/​syncopaid/​database.py:1-50 - Schema and imports
• src/​syncopaid/​config.py:15-45 - DEFAULT_CONFIG dict

Research Output: Before writing the plan, you should know:

• Exact files to create/​modify (with line numbers for modifications)
• The function signatures and data structures involved
• How to test this feature (unit test location, fixtures needed)
• Any edge cases mentioned in story notes

Step 4.5: Assess Complexity

Goal: Determine if this story needs a single plan or multiple incremental sub-plans.

Complexity Indicators:

Calculate total score:

score = (
    new_tables * 2 +
    new_modules * 1 +
    ui_changes * 1 +
    (files_modified // 3) * 1 +
    external_deps * 1
)

Thresholds:

• 0-2 = LOW → Single plan file (proceed to Step 5)
• 3-5 = MEDIUM → 2-4 sub-plans (proceed to Step 4.6)
• 6+ = HIGH → 4+ sub-plans (proceed to Step 4.6)

Interactive Mode: Report complexity assessment and ask for confirmation before proceeding. CI Mode: Auto-decompose based on score.

Step 4.6: Decompose into Sub-Plans (Medium/​High Only)

Skip this step for LOW complexity stories.

Goal: Break the story into independently verifiable sub-plans, ordered for fail-fast bug discovery.

Fail-Fast Ordering Principle

Order sub-plans so each builds on a verified foundation. Errors surface immediately, not 3 steps later.

Standard layer order:

1. Database/​Schema — Schema errors break everything downstream
2. Core logic modules — Can be unit tested in isolation
3. Integration points — Connect modules, test wiring
4. UI last — Depends on all prior layers working

Example decomposition for "Import Clients & Matters":

045: Database schema (foundation)
046: Folder parser (core logic, testable in isolation)
047: Dialog UI (depends on parser)
048: Menu integration (thin wiring)
049: Time assignment UI (extends feature)

Sub-Plan Sizing

Each sub-plan should be:

• LOW complexity when assessed individually (~15-30 min implementation)
• 2-5 TDD tasks
• Independently verifiable with clear test/​verification commands
• Single responsibility — one layer or concern per sub-plan

Determine Next Sequence Number

Query existing handovers to find next available number:

ls .claude/​data/​plans/​*.md | tail -5

Use the pattern: NNN_[story-slug]-[component].md

Example sequence:

• 045_import-clients-matters-db-schema.md
• 046_import-clients-matters-folder-parser.md
• 047_import-clients-matters-dialog-ui.md
• 048_import-clients-matters-menu-integration.md

Generate Sub-Plan Outline

Before writing files, outline the decomposition:

## Sub-Plan Decomposition

**Story:** [Story Title]
**Complexity Score:** [N] (MEDIUM/​HIGH)
**Sub-Plans:** [count]

| # | File | Focus | Dependencies |
|---|------|-------|--------------|
| 045 | ...-db-schema.md | Database tables | None |
| 046 | ...-folder-parser.md | Core logic | 045 |
| 047 | ...-dialog-ui.md | UI component | 045, 046 |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |

Interactive Mode: Present outline for approval before generating files. CI Mode: Generate all sub-plan files.

Step 5: Create Plan File(s)

For LOW complexity: Single plan file → .claude/​data/​plans/​NNN_[story-slug].md

For MEDIUM/​HIGH complexity: Multiple handover files → .claude/​data/​plans/​NNN_[story-slug]-[component].md

Query existing handovers to find next available number:

ls .claude/​data/​plans/​*.md | tail -5

---

CRITICAL: Story ID in Header

Every plan file MUST include the Story ID in the header. Replace [ID] with the actual story ID from the database (e.g., 1.2.3).

The story-execution skill detects "orphan plans" (plans without valid Story IDs) and archives them. Plans missing the Story ID will be skipped during execution.

Format: **Story ID:** X.Y.Z (where X.Y.Z is the story's id field from story_nodes table)

---

LOW Complexity: Single TDD Plan

Filename: .claude/​data/​plans/​NNN_[story-slug].md

• NNN = next available sequence number (e.g., 050, 051)
• [story-slug] = title in lowercase-kebab-case (max 40 chars)

Interactive Mode Template

# [Story Title] - Implementation Plan

> **For Claude:** REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: Use superpowers:executing-plans to implement this plan task-by-task.

**Story ID:** [ID] | **Created:** [YYYY-MM-DD] | **Stage:** `planned`

---

**Goal:** [One-sentence summary of what this achieves]
**Approach:** [2-3 sentences on technical approach]
**Tech Stack:** [Key modules/​libraries involved]

---

## Story Context

**Title:** [title]
**Description:** [description]

**Acceptance Criteria:**
- [ ] [Criterion 1]
- [ ] [Criterion 2]

**Notes:** [Any notes from story]

## Prerequisites

- [ ] Virtual environment activated: `venv\Scripts\activate`
- [ ] Dependencies installed
- [ ] Related stories completed: [list or "None"]
- [ ] Baseline tests pass: `python -m pytest -v`

## Files Affected

| File | Change Type | Purpose |
|------|-------------|---------|
| `tests/​test_x.py` | Create | Unit tests for feature |
| `src/​syncopaid/​x.py` | Modify | Core implementation |

## TDD Tasks

### Task 1: [Descriptive Name] (~N min)

**Files:**
- Create: `path/​to/​file.py`
- Modify: `path/​to/​existing.py:123-145`
- Test: `tests/​path/​to/​test.py`

**Context:** [Why this task exists and what it enables for subsequent tasks]

**Step 1 - RED:** Write failing test
```python
# tests/​test_x.py
def test_behavior():
    """[What this test verifies]"""
    result = module.func(input)
    assert result == expected

Step 2 - Verify RED:

pytest tests/​test_x.py::test_behavior -v

Expected: FAILED - test fails because [specific reason]

Step 3 - GREEN: Write minimal implementation

# src/​syncopaid/​x.py (lines 45-60)
def func(input):
    """[Brief docstring]"""
    return result

Step 4 - Verify GREEN:

pytest tests/​test_x.py::test_behavior -v

Expected: PASSED

Step 5 - COMMIT:

git add tests/​test_x.py src/​syncopaid/​x.py && git commit -m "feat: add behavior"

---

Task 2: [Next Task] (~N min)

[Repeat structure...]

---

Verification Checklist

• All new tests pass
• All existing tests pass: python -m pytest -v
• Module runs without error: python -m syncopaid.[module]
• Manual verification: [specific checks]

Rollback Plan

If issues arise:

1. git revert HEAD~N (where N = number of commits)
2. [Any cleanup steps]

Implementation Notes

[Edge cases, gotchas, future considerations]

Execution Handoff

Plan complete and saved to .claude/​data/​plans/[filename].

Two execution options:

1. Subagent-Driven (this session)

• I dispatch fresh subagent per task
• Code review between tasks
• Fast iteration with quality gates
• REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: superpowers:subagent-driven-development

2. Parallel Session (separate)

• Open new Claude Code session in this directory
• Batch execution with checkpoints
• REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: superpowers:executing-plans

Which approach?

#### CI Mode Template (Compact, Self-Contained)

```markdown
# [Story Title] - Implementation Plan

> **For Claude:** REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: Use superpowers:executing-plans to implement this plan task-by-task.

**Story ID:** [ID] | **Created:** [YYYY-MM-DD] | **Stage:** `planned`

> **TDD Required:** Each task (~2-5 min): Write test → verify RED → Write code → verify GREEN → Commit
> **Zero Context:** This plan assumes the implementer knows nothing about the codebase.

---

**Goal:** [One sentence - what user-visible outcome does this achieve?]
**Approach:** [2-3 sentences on technical approach]
**Tech Stack:** [Modules/​libraries involved]

---

## Story Context

**Title:** [title]
**Description:** [description]

**Acceptance Criteria:**
- [ ] [Criterion 1]
- [ ] [Criterion 2]

## Prerequisites

- [ ] venv activated: `source venv/​bin/​activate`
- [ ] Module importable: `pip install -e .` (if not already installed)
- [ ] Baseline tests pass: `python -m pytest -v`

## TDD Tasks

### Task 1: [Descriptive Name] (~N min)

**Files:**
- Create: `tests/​path/​test_x.py`
- Modify: `src/​path/​x.py:123-145`
- Test: `tests/​path/​test_x.py`

**Context:** [1-2 sentences: why this task exists, what it enables]

**Step 1 - RED:** Write failing test
```python
# tests/​path/​test_x.py
def test_behavior():
    """[What this test verifies]"""
    result = module.func(input)
    assert result == expected

Step 2 - Verify RED:

pytest tests/​path/​test_x.py::test_behavior -v

Expected output: FAILED (test should fail because [reason])

Step 3 - GREEN: Write minimal implementation

# src/​path/​x.py (lines 123-145)
def func(input):
    """[Brief docstring]"""
    return result

Step 4 - Verify GREEN:

pytest tests/​path/​test_x.py::test_behavior -v

Expected output: PASSED

Step 5 - COMMIT:

git add tests/​path/​test_x.py src/​path/​x.py && git commit -m "feat: [message]"

---

Task 2: [Next Task Name] (~N min)

[Repeat same structure...]

---

Final Verification

Run after all tasks complete:

python -m pytest -v                    # All tests pass
python -m syncopaid.[module]           # Module runs without error

Rollback

If issues arise: git log --oneline -10 to find commit, then git revert <hash>

Notes

[Edge cases discovered, follow-up work, dependencies on other stories]

**Quality Requirements (both modes):**
- **Exact file paths** with line numbers where modifying existing code
- **Complete code** - copy-paste ready, not "add validation here"
- **Exact commands** with expected output (not "run tests")
- **Zero ambiguity** - implementer makes no decisions, just executes
- **Zero context assumption** - explain why, not just what

**CI Mode Autonomy:**
In CI mode, the plan must be executable without human guidance:
- No "choose between A or B" - make the decision in the plan
- No "verify manually" - provide automated verification commands
- No "ask if unclear" - the plan IS the clarity

---

#### MEDIUM/​HIGH Complexity: Incremental Sub-Plans

**Output path:** `.claude/​data/​plans/​NNN_[story-slug]-[component].md`

Each sub-plan is a focused, independently verifiable unit. Use this template:

```markdown
# NNN: [Story Title] - [Component Name]

> **For Claude:** REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: Use superpowers:executing-plans to implement this plan task-by-task.

**Story ID:** [ID] | **Created:** YYYY-MM-DD | **Stage:** `planned`

## Task
[One sentence describing what this sub-plan accomplishes]

## Context
[2-3 sentences explaining why this component exists and how it fits the larger story]

**Design principle**: [Key architectural decision or constraint]

## Scope
- [Bullet point 1]
- [Bullet point 2]
- [Bullet point 3]

## Key Files

| File | Purpose |
|------|---------|
| `path/​to/​file.py` | Brief description |
| `path/​to/​other.py:45-60` | Line-specific modification |

## Implementation Details

[Technical specification with code snippets, data structures, function signatures]

```python
# Example code block showing exact implementation
def function_name():
    pass

Verification

source venv/​bin/​activate

# Test command 1
[command]
# Expected: [output]

# Test command 2
[command]
# Expected: [output]

Dependencies

• Task NNN-1 (component name) should be complete first

Next Task

After this: NNN+1_[story-slug]-[next-component].md

**Sub-Plan Quality Requirements:**
- Each sub-plan is **LOW complexity** when assessed individually
- **Clear dependencies** — explicitly list which prior sub-plans must complete first
- **Independent verification** — each sub-plan has its own test commands
- **Fail-fast order** — database → core logic → integration → UI
- **Link chain** — each sub-plan references the next in "Next Task" section

### Step 6: Update Stage

**For LOW complexity (single plan):**
```python
python -c "
import sqlite3
conn = sqlite3.connect('.claude/​data/​story-tree.db')
conn.execute('''
    UPDATE story_nodes
    SET stage = 'planned',
        notes = COALESCE(notes || chr(10), '') || 'Plan: .claude/​data/​plans/[FILENAME]',
        updated_at = datetime('now')
    WHERE id = '[STORY_ID]'
''')
conn.commit()
conn.close()
"

For MEDIUM/​HIGH complexity (sub-plans):

python -c "
import sqlite3
conn = sqlite3.connect('.claude/​data/​story-tree.db')
conn.execute('''
    UPDATE story_nodes
    SET stage = 'planned',
        notes = COALESCE(notes || chr(10), '') || 'Sub-plans: .claude/​data/​plans/[START]-[END]_[slug]*.md',
        updated_at = datetime('now')
    WHERE id = '[STORY_ID]'
''')
conn.commit()
conn.close()
"

Step 7: Execution Handoff (Interactive Only)

Skip this step in CI mode.

For LOW complexity (single plan):

Present two options:

Option 1: Continue in this session - Implement with tight feedback loops, interactive course correction

Option 2: Fresh session - Open new Claude Code session, say "Execute plan: .claude/​data/​plans/[filename]"

For MEDIUM/​HIGH complexity (sub-plans):

Present sub-plan execution order:

## Execution Order

Complete sub-plans sequentially. Verify each before proceeding to next.

1. Execute: .claude/​data/​plans/​045_[slug]-db-schema.md
   Verify: [verification command]

2. Execute: .claude/​data/​plans/​046_[slug]-core-logic.md
   Verify: [verification command]

[... continue for all sub-plans ...]

Option 1: Continue in this session - Execute sub-plans sequentially with verification between each

Option 2: Fresh session per sub-plan - Each sub-plan in a new session for clean context

Remember

When generating plans, always:

• Exact file paths - never "somewhere in src/"
• Complete code - not "add validation" but the actual validation code
• Exact commands with expected output - not just "run tests"
• DRY, YAGNI, TDD - test first, minimal code, frequent commits
• One action per step - each step takes 2-5 minutes max
• Reference relevant skills - use @ syntax for skill references

Output Format

CI Mode - LOW complexity Success:

✓ Planned story [STORY_ID]: [Title]
  Complexity: LOW (score [N])
  Plan: .claude/​data/​plans/[filename].md
  Tasks: [N] TDD cycles
  Stage: approved -> planned

CI Mode - MEDIUM/​HIGH complexity Success:

✓ Planned story [STORY_ID]: [Title]
  Complexity: [MEDIUM|HIGH] (score [N])
  Sub-plans: [count] files
    - .claude/​data/​plans/[NNN]_[slug]-[component].md
    - .claude/​data/​plans/[NNN+1]_[slug]-[component].md
    - ...
  Execution order: [NNN] → [NNN+1] → ... → [NNN+M]
  Stage: approved -> planned

CI Mode - No stories:

✓ No approved stories available for planning

Interactive Mode: Conversational summary with handoff options.

Quality Checks

Before completing the workflow, verify:

• All approved stories were fetched and analyzed
• Priority scoring was applied correctly
• Each task has exactly 5 steps: test, verify fail, implement, verify pass, commit
• All code examples are complete and copy-paste ready
• All commands include expected output
• No vague instructions like "add validation" or "handle errors"
• Execution handoff options are presented at end (Interactive mode only)

Common Mistakes