claude/skills/checkpoint-planner/SKILL.md
Use this skill when a user explicitly asks to plan or break down a multi-step project. Produces checkpoint-based plans that surface unknowns early, identify risks, and write structured markdown plan files. Trigger phrases: "plan this", "help me plan", "make a plan", "break this down", "checkpoint plan", "where do I start", "what should I do first", "I'm overwhelmed", "I don't know where to begin". Also trigger when the user describes a large effort (migration, multi-service refactor, compliance project, infrastructure overhaul) and asks for help structuring or sequencing the work. Do NOT trigger for single-task requests like writing a script, fixing a bug, creating a diagram, writing a document, or optimizing a query — those are execution tasks, not planning tasks.
npx skillsauth add lilpacy/dotfiles checkpoint-plannerInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Planning fails when too many things are held in your head at once, key unknowns are discovered too late, and the plan isn't checked early enough. The solution is not to make a perfect big plan. The solution is to make smaller plans that fail earlier.
The target is: notice wrong plans earlier and more cheaply.
Plan only the next checkpoint - Never plan the whole project at once. Plan only the next meaningful milestone where you can verify you're on the right track.
Surface unknowns before doing work - The things you don't know are more dangerous than the things you do know. Unknowns discovered late are expensive. Unknowns discovered early are cheap.
Plans must exist outside your head - If the plan lives only in memory, it will drift, lose details, and miss things. Write it down in a file you can check while working.
Make reversible steps - Don't commit too early to a huge direction. Break work into chunks where you can still change course without wasting too much effort.
Review at 10-20%, not at 90% - Don't wait until the work is almost finished to check whether the plan was correct. Review when you're only a small fraction done, so the cost of changing direction is still low.
Before anything else, ask the user for these three things. If they've already provided some in the conversation, extract what you can and ask only for what's missing.
These three things are the minimum. Do not skip them. Do not jump ahead to planning steps before these are answered. The reason is that without a clear goal, you plan the wrong thing; without surfacing unknowns, you discover them too late; without a first proof, you do too much work before validating direction.
Before writing the plan, challenge assumptions. Ask the user (or think through together):
This step exists because the most expensive planning mistake is solving the wrong problem. A few minutes of questioning here can save hours or days of wasted work.
Write a markdown file to the project. Use the path plans/checkpoint-<slug>.md relative to the project root (create the plans/ directory if needed). If the user specifies a different location, use that instead.
The plan file uses this template:
# Checkpoint Plan: <title>
**Created**: <date>
**Status**: Active
## Goal
<one clear sentence>
## Constraints
<what limits or boundaries exist - time, budget, technical, organizational>
## What I Know
<facts, confirmed information, things already verified>
## What I Don't Know
<unknowns, assumptions, things that need verification>
<mark the most dangerous unknown with [CRITICAL]>
## First Proof (Checkpoint 1)
<the smallest thing that proves the direction is right>
<what does "passing" this checkpoint look like?>
## What Could Make This Plan Wrong
<risks, wrong assumptions, external factors>
## Review Point
<when to review - aim for 10-20% of estimated effort>
<what questions to ask at review time>
For tasks that are clearly non-trivial (multi-day, multi-person, or involving systems you don't fully control), add these sections to the plan file:
## Dependencies
<what must exist or happen before this work can proceed>
<external teams, APIs, approvals, data>
## Edge Cases
<scenarios that are easy to forget>
<error states, empty states, concurrent access, rollback>
## Checkpoints
| # | Checkpoint | Pass Criteria | Review? |
|---|-----------|--------------|---------|
| 1 | <first proof> | <what success looks like> | Yes |
| 2 | <next milestone> | <criteria> | |
| 3 | <next milestone> | <criteria> | Yes |
## Definition of Done
<what "finished" actually means - be specific>
<include: tested, reviewed, deployed, documented?>
After writing the plan, tell the user:
Do not present a long list of future steps. The whole point is to focus on what's next, not what's eventually.
Ask, don't assume. If the user gives a vague request, ask clarifying questions before writing a plan. Bad assumptions baked into a plan are worse than no plan at all.
Keep plans short. A good checkpoint plan fits on one screen. If it's getting long, you're planning too far ahead. Split it.
Flag the scariest unknown. Every plan should have at least one unknown marked as [CRITICAL]. If you can't find one, you probably haven't thought hard enough about what could go wrong.
One checkpoint at a time. After the user completes a checkpoint, they can come back and plan the next one. Don't front-load all the checkpoints at creation time unless the user explicitly asks for a roadmap.
Plans are living documents. When the user returns after completing a checkpoint, update the plan file - mark checkpoints as done, add new unknowns discovered, adjust the direction if needed.
development
Use when searching the web or reading online documentation. Prefer DuckDuckGo for search and read documents through npx curl.md instead of raw HTML.
testing
Use when writing or editing tests. Tests should be ordered by near-normal, normal, then abnormal cases where applicable, and test names must be Japanese behavior descriptions from a reviewer/user perspective.
development
GoF/オブジェクト指向デザインパターンを関数型プログラミング(pure functions, higher-order functions, ADT, composition, immutability, effect boundaries)でシンプルに整理・設計・リファクタリングする。Strategy/Factory/Adapter/ObserverなどGoF全23パターンのFP置き換え、適用判断、具体事例を提示する必要があるときに使う。
tools
Use when committing, pushing, or preparing PRs. Defines the user's commit workflow, message style discovery, review handoff, and branch/worktree push requirements.