--- name: plan-big description: Create a large Pi plan before implementation. Use for open-ended or high-risk repo efforts needing 10 or more planning questions, web research, concurrent reviewer or criticizer refinement, and refinement until convergence; exclude direct implementation-only, factual/explanation, trivial command-only, or explicit no-plan requests. --- # Plan Big Use this skill when the user wants a large, high-risk, or open-ended plan before a repository change. ## Pi Setup Read `../../references/pi-planning-workflow.md` and `../../references/state-and-config.md` — both normative — and follow their setup, state, `language`, and reviewer/criticizer rules. Initialize workspace state with the `plans` tool (`action: "init"`); state lives in `.git/pi_plans/`. Ask every question with the `ask_choice` tool; run refinement rounds with the `refine` tool. ## Depth Contract - Inspect the target Git repo read-only before the first product question. - Ask at least 10 planning questions; no maximum — stop only when the decision tree is genuinely resolved. Each via `ask_choice` (recommended option first; the tool adds `Other` second-last and `Auto-complete` last). Every option you write carries a `description` of `✓ / ✗ ` in the configured language, kept terse — the user chooses by weighing what each option gains against what it costs. Phase them in batches of up to 8: submit ONE `questions: [...]` form call per phase, think about the answers, then continue with the next batch or follow-ups. - Batch protocol (0.4.0): when a round has several questions, submit them together as one `ask_choice` call with `questions: [...]` (2-8 items, recommended option first per question) — the tool opens one tabbed multiple-choice form with a submit page instead of asking one at a time. After the batch returns, think about the answers, then follow up in later calls (batch again for 2+ related follow-ups; single `question` for one). `Esc` on the form returns the answered subset as partial answers — continue with what you got and re-ask only what matters. The final scope confirmation and the execution handoff are ALWAYS single-question calls with `autoComplete: false`; batches reject those questions. - Use web research during both brainstorming and refinement when outside facts, patterns, or ecosystem constraints matter, and cite sources in the plan. Optionally (never required) you may also search 1–2 named references — a paper (e.g. arXiv), an engineering blog post, or another repository — whose technique or measurements strengthen the plan's reasoning; cite their URLs in the plan's Evidence section. This optional reference search does not count against the planning-question limit and never requires downloading or analyzing material (that is plan-with-refs' job). - Ask the final scope confirmation, then write `PLAN_v1.md` per `../../references/plan-artifact-template.md`. - After each plan version, ask the merged accept/execute question via `ask_choice` with `autoComplete: false` — never run `refine` unless the user picked another round at that question. Default sequence: one `Reviewer` round as three concurrent independent reviewers (`refine` with `reviewers: 3`, consolidated by the main agent per the shared workflow), then one `Criticizer` round; afterwards the recommended option is `✓ Accept & execute now` in the merged accept/execute question. Beyond the default sequence, refine until convergence on high-priority findings, unresolved questions, or evidence gaps; surface at most five per round. Then the merged accept/execute question (ask_choice with `autoComplete: false`: ✓ Accept & execute now / Accept, don't execute yet / another round) and the `execute_plan` tool. ## Fit New systems, large feature surfaces, cross-repository or cross-service work, open-ended architecture, safety-sensitive changes, unclear user workflows, or plans whose shape is not yet known. Use `plan-with-refs` instead when external projects, papers, articles, or documentation must be downloaded and studied before planning choices are safe.