Flow plan

Turn a rough idea into a spec with tasks in .flow/. This skill does not write code.

Follow this skill and linked workflows exactly. Deviations cause drift, bad gates, retries, and user frustration.

IMPORTANT: This plugin uses .flow/ for ALL task tracking. Do NOT use markdown TODOs, plan files, TodoWrite, or other tracking methods. All task state must be read and written via flowctl.

Preamble

CRITICAL: flowctl is BUNDLED — NOT installed globally. which flowctl will fail (expected). Define once; subsequent blocks (here and in steps.md) use $FLOWCTL:

FLOWCTL="${DROID_PLUGIN_ROOT:-${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}}/scripts/flowctl"
[ -x "$FLOWCTL" ] || FLOWCTL=".flow/bin/flowctl"

Pre-check: Local setup version

If .flow/meta.json exists and has setup_version, compare to plugin version:

SETUP_VER=$(jq -r '.setup_version // empty' .flow/meta.json 2>/dev/null)
PLUGIN_JSON="${DROID_PLUGIN_ROOT:-${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}}/.claude-plugin/plugin.json"
PLUGIN_VER=$(jq -r '.version' "$PLUGIN_JSON" 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown")
if [[ -n "$SETUP_VER" && "$PLUGIN_VER" != "unknown" ]]; then
  [[ "$SETUP_VER" = "$PLUGIN_VER" ]] || echo "Plugin updated to v${PLUGIN_VER}. Run /flow-next:setup to refresh local scripts (current: v${SETUP_VER})."
fi

Continue regardless (non-blocking).

Role: product-minded planner with strong repo awareness. Goal: produce a spec with tasks that match existing conventions and reuse points. Task size: every task must fit one /flow-next:work iteration (~100k tokens max). If it won't, split it.

The Golden Rule: No Implementation Code

Plans are specs, not implementations. Do NOT write the code that will be implemented.

Code IS allowed:

• Signatures/interfaces (what, not how): function validate(input: string): Result
• Patterns from this repo (with file:line ref): "Follow pattern at src/auth.ts:42"
• Recent/surprising APIs (from docs-scout): "React 19 changed X — use useOptimistic instead"
• Non-obvious gotchas (from practice-scout): "Must call cleanup() or memory leaks"

Code is FORBIDDEN:

• Complete function implementations
• Full class/module bodies
• "Here's what you'll write" blocks
• Copy-paste ready snippets (>10 lines)

Why: Implementation happens in /flow-next:work with fresh context. Writing it here wastes tokens in planning, review, AND implementation — then causes drift when the implementer does it differently anyway.

Input

Full request: $ARGUMENTS

Accepts:

• Feature/bug description in natural language
• Flow spec ID fn-N-slug (e.g., fn-1-add-oauth) or legacy fn-N/fn-N-xxx to refine existing spec
• Flow task ID fn-N-slug.M (e.g., fn-1-add-oauth.2) or legacy fn-N.M/fn-N-xxx.M to refine specific task
• Resolvable tracker handle — a tracker key like wor-17 / wor-17.2 that flowctl show resolves to the linked spec/task (fn-52.10). Treated as the existing spec/task, never as a new idea (R16). See the handle-recognition rule in Step 1.
• Chained instructions like "then review with /flow-next:plan-review"

Examples:

• /flow-next:plan Add OAuth login for users
• /flow-next:plan fn-1-add-oauth
• /flow-next:plan fn-1 (legacy formats fn-1, fn-1-xxx still supported)
• /flow-next:plan fn-1-add-oauth then review via /flow-next:plan-review

If empty, ask: "What should I plan? Give me the feature or bug in 1-5 sentences." Under autonomous mode, do not ask — report NEEDS_HUMAN: no planning input provided and stop.

FIRST: Parse Options or Ask Questions

Check configured backend:

REVIEW_BACKEND=$($FLOWCTL review-backend)

Returns: ASK (not configured), or rp/codex/none (configured).

Autonomous mode (mode:autonomous / FLOW_AUTONOMOUS)

Parse $ARGUMENTS for the literal token mode:autonomous (strip it, same shape as capture's mode:autofix — a NEW parse branch, never overloading that token). Also honor the env var FLOW_AUTONOMOUS=1 as a secondary signal (process-level drivers). Either signal → AUTONOMOUS=1.

Under AUTONOMOUS=1:

• Ask NO setup questions. Explicit passthrough flags (--depth, --research, --review) win as usual; for anything unset, apply the autonomous defaults: depth = short, research = grep (repo-scout), review = configured backend (none when REVIEW_BACKEND is ASK).
• Never hang on a question. If a genuinely unanswerable ambiguity remains (e.g. empty input), stop cleanly with a one-line NEEDS_HUMAN: <reason> report instead of asking.
• Autonomy ≠ Ralph: neither mode:autonomous nor FLOW_AUTONOMOUS activates ralph-guard hooks or any receipt path — they gate question suppression only.

Option Parsing (skip questions if found in arguments)

Parse the arguments for these patterns. If found, use them and skip questions:

Research approach:

• --research=rp or --research rp or "use rp" or "context-scout" or "use repoprompt" → context-scout (errors at runtime if rp-cli missing)
• --research=grep or --research grep or "use grep" or "repo-scout" or "fast" → repo-scout

Review mode:

• --review=codex or "review with codex" or "codex review" or "use codex" → Codex CLI (GPT 5.5 High)
• --review=rp or "review with rp" or "rp chat" or "repoprompt review" → RepoPrompt chat (via flowctl rp chat-send)
• --review=export or "export review" or "external llm" → export for external LLM
• --review=none or --no-review or "no review" or "skip review" → no review

If options NOT found in arguments

Plan depth (parse from args or ask):

• --depth=short or "quick" or "minimal" → SHORT
• --depth=standard or "normal" → STANDARD
• --depth=deep or "comprehensive" or "detailed" → DEEP
• Default: SHORT (simpler is better)

If AUTONOMOUS=1: skip every question below — apply the autonomous defaults above and continue.

If REVIEW_BACKEND is rp, codex, or none (already configured): Only ask research question. Show override hint:

Quick setup: Use RepoPrompt for deeper context?
a) Yes, context-scout (slower, thorough)
b) No, repo-scout (faster)

(Reply: "a", "b", or just tell me)
(Tip: --depth=short|standard|deep, --review=rp|codex|none)

If REVIEW_BACKEND is ASK (not configured): Ask all questions (do NOT use AskUserQuestion tool):

Quick setup before planning:

1. **Plan depth** — How detailed?
   a) Short — problem, acceptance, key context only
   b) Standard (default) — + approach, risks, test notes
   c) Deep — + phases, alternatives, rollout plan

2. **Research** — Use RepoPrompt for deeper context?
   a) Yes, context-scout (slower, thorough)
   b) No, repo-scout (faster)

3. **Review** — Run Carmack-level review after?
   a) Codex CLI
   b) RepoPrompt
   c) Export for external LLM
   d) None (configure later)

(Reply: "1a 2b 3d", or just tell me naturally)

Wait for response. Parse naturally — user may reply terse ("1a 2b") or ramble via voice.

Defaults when empty/ambiguous:

• Depth = standard (balanced detail)
• Research = grep (repo-scout)
• Review = configured backend if set, else none

Workflow

Read steps.md and follow each step in order.

Step 1 readiness soft-check (fn-58): existing-spec inputs get an adoption-gated readiness check BEFORE the scout fan-out — warn-not-block, default proceed; repos that never adopted readiness see nothing. Details in steps.md Step 1.

Step 8.5 HTML render lens (opt-in): when artifacts.html.enabled is true, planning regenerates .flow/artifacts/<spec-id>/spec.html with the plan layer (task DAG + R-ID coverage) per the shared disclosure reference (plugins/flow-next/references/html-artifacts.md) — generated only after the Step 8 refinement loop exits, link line replaced in place in the spec md. With the mode off/unset there is zero artifact-related behavior or output. Details in steps.md Step 8.5.

CRITICAL — Step 1 (Research): You MUST launch ALL scouts