# Plan Coding Work With Structured Decisions

Teams often start coding before requirements, scope, and tradeoffs are clear. This skill guides Claude, Codex, and Claude Code through structured planning and prioritization.

## Install

```bash
npx skillstore add 5minfutures/planning-framework
```

## Metadata

- Status: approved
- Slug: 5minfutures-planning-framework
- Skillstore revision: r1
- Version status: missing
- Tree hash: 39f4742a36fae85b42b3567c535fd9fb2411ecf7200ac0f0c379f82811346720
- Author: 5MinFutures
- GitHub username: 5MinFutures
- License: MIT
- Repository: https://github.com/5MinFutures/futures-arena/tree/main/.claude/skills/planning-framework
- Ref: c1fdca50ff516318f65fed0d7f9e82797c5171dc
- Supported tools: Claude, Codex, Claude Code
- Audit status: complete
- Agent install advisory: allowed
- Manual install advisory: allowed
- Artifact signature: available
- Audit attestation: unavailable
- Human verification: not\_verified
- Risk factors: external\_commands
- Quality score: 78
- Quality tier: bronze
- Public page: https://skillstore.pages.dev/skills/5minfutures-planning-framework
- Manifest: https://skillstore.pages.dev/api/skills/5minfutures-planning-framework/manifest

## Capabilities

- Guides requirement questioning before coding starts.
- Uses a 5-step framework to remove, simplify, accelerate, and automate work.
- Applies ICE scoring to compare feature and refactor options.
- Provides planning checklists for features, refactors, and testing setup.
- Highlights red flags such as unclear estimates, weak typing, and oversized components.

## Use Cases

- Feature Planning: Turn a feature request into requirements, tradeoffs, priority, and a short implementation plan.
- Architecture Decisions: Compare implementation approaches before committing to dependencies, state management, or automation.
- Refactor Prioritization: Decide which cleanup work matters now and which work should remain in the backlog.

## Prompt Templates

### Plan a Small Feature

```
Plan [feature] using this framework. Question the requirement, identify deletions, compare options with ICE scoring, and produce a short implementation plan.
```

### Compare Two Approaches

```
Compare [approach A] and [approach B]. Use impact, confidence, and ease scores, then recommend the simpler option with risks.
```

### Simplify a Refactor

```
Review this refactor idea: [description]. Identify what to delete, what to extract, what to defer, and what tests reduce risk.
```

### Create a Full Delivery Plan

```
Build a delivery plan for [project]. Include requirement questions, ICE scores, file impact, staged increments, edge cases, and validation steps.
```

## Limitations

- Does not execute plans or modify code by itself.
- Does not replace product requirements or stakeholder approval.
- Uses examples from one project, so teams must adapt details.
- May mention package-management commands that require user review.

## Best Practices

- Question the requirement before comparing implementation options.
- Delete unnecessary scope before optimizing the remaining design.
- Use ICE scores as a discussion aid, not as the only decision rule.

## Anti Patterns

- Starting implementation before defining the real problem.
- Adding dependencies before checking simpler existing options.
- Treating early time estimates as reliable without risk review.

## Security Audit

- Audited at: 2026-07-06T00:40:45.399\+00:00
- Summary: All 24 static findings are false positives caused by Markdown inline code, code fences, visible package-management examples, and normal planning prose in SKILL.md. No evidence found for prompt injection, data exfiltration intent, hidden execution, or system reconnaissance.

## Stats

- Views: 212
- Downloads: 25
- Favorites: 0
- Popularity score: 0