Platform Notes
- Optional helper plugins may help in some environments, but they must not be treated as required for this skill.
SDLC Planning Skill
Use When
- Generate Planning & Management documentation for SDLC projects. Covers Project Vision & Scope, SDP, SCMP, QA Plan, Risk Plan, SRS, and Feasibility Study. Use when starting a new project, conducting project governance, or establishing the planning...
- The task needs reusable judgment, domain constraints, or a proven workflow rather than ad hoc advice.
Do Not Use When
- The task is unrelated to
sdlc-planning or would be better handled by a more specific companion skill.
- The request only needs a trivial answer and none of this skill's constraints or references materially help.
Required Inputs
- Gather relevant project context, constraints, and the concrete problem to solve; load
templates only as needed.
- Confirm the desired deliverable: design, code, review, migration plan, audit, or documentation.
Workflow
- Read this
SKILL.md first, then load only the referenced deep-dive files that are necessary for the task.
- Apply the ordered guidance, checklists, and decision rules in this skill instead of cherry-picking isolated snippets.
- Produce the deliverable with assumptions, risks, and follow-up work made explicit when they matter.
Quality Standards
- Keep outputs execution-oriented, concise, and aligned with the repository's baseline engineering standards.
- Preserve compatibility with existing project conventions unless the skill explicitly requires a stronger standard.
- Prefer deterministic, reviewable steps over vague advice or tool-specific magic.
Anti-Patterns
- Treating examples as copy-paste truth without checking fit, constraints, or failure modes.
- Loading every reference file by default instead of using progressive disclosure.
Outputs
- A concrete result that fits the task: implementation guidance, review findings, architecture decisions, templates, or generated artifacts.
- Clear assumptions, tradeoffs, or unresolved gaps when the task cannot be completed from available context alone.
- References used, companion skills, or follow-up actions when they materially improve execution.
Evidence Produced
| Category |
Artifact |
Format |
Example |
| Release evidence |
SDLC planning document set |
Markdown docs covering Project Vision & Scope, SDP, SCMP, QA Plan, and Risk Plan |
docs/sdlc/planning-2026-04-16.md |
References
- Use the
templates/ directory when the task needs a structured deliverable.
Generate a complete Planning & Management documentation suite for software development projects. This skill produces 7 foundational documents that establish the project baseline before any code is written.
Load Order
- Load
world-class-engineering.
- Load this skill to define the planning baseline and phase-entry gates.
- Pair it with
engineering-management-system, advanced-testing-strategy, and deployment-release-engineering when the plan must be executable.
Executable Planning Standard
Planning documents must define more than scope. They must define:
- critical flows and risk class
- measurable success criteria and service expectations
- delivery slices and release assumptions
- testing, observability, and rollback expectations
- ownership for decisions, operations, and follow-up
When to Use
- Starting a new SaaS project and need a governance baseline
- Establishing project planning documents for stakeholders or investors
- Conducting a feasibility study before committing resources
- Setting up configuration management and quality assurance processes
- Creating a software development plan for the team
- Building a risk management framework for an upcoming project
- Preparing a full-system SRS (not just requirements interview or Android-only)
When NOT to Use
- Gathering raw requirements via interview -- use
project-requirements skill instead
- Planning a single feature (spec + implementation) -- use
feature-planning skill
- Planning an Android companion app (PRD, SDS, API Contract) -- use
mobile-saas-planning skill
- Writing design documents (SDD, architecture, database design) -- use
sdlc-design skill
- Writing test plans with test cases -- use
sdlc-testing skill
- Writing deployment or user documentation -- use
sdlc-user-deploy skill
Document Inventory
| # |
Document |
File |
Purpose |
Audience |
Length |
| 1 |
Project Vision & Scope |
templates/project-vision-scope.md |
Establish the "why" and "what" |
Stakeholders, sponsors, investors |
15-30 pages |
| 2 |
Software Development Plan |
templates/software-development-plan.md |
Management & technical approach |
PM, dev leads, QA |
20-40 pages |
| 3 |
Configuration Management Plan |
templates/configuration-management-plan.md |
Change & version control processes |
DevOps, dev leads, release mgrs |
15-25 pages |
| 4 |
Quality Assurance Plan |
templates/quality-assurance-plan.md |
Quality processes & standards |
QA team, devs, PM |
15-25 pages |
| 5 |
Risk Management Plan |
templates/risk-management-plan.md |
Identify, assess, mitigate risks |
PM, stakeholders, dev leads |
15-25 pages |
| 6 |
Software Requirements Spec |
templates/software-requirements-spec.md |
Full functional & non-functional requirements |
Devs, QA, stakeholders, architects |
30-60 pages |
| 7 |
Feasibility Study Report |
templates/feasibility-study-report.md |
Viability analysis before commitment |
Decision makers, investors, sponsors |
15-30 pages |
Generation Workflow
Generate documents in this order. Each builds on the previous.
Step 1: Gather context (use project-requirements skill if not done)
|
Step 2: Feasibility Study Report (Go/No-Go decision)
|
Step 3: Project Vision & Scope (approved vision)
|
Step 4: Software Requirements Specification (full requirements)
|
Step 5: Software Development Plan (how to build it)
|
Step 6: Configuration Management Plan (how to manage changes)
|
Step 7: Quality Assurance Plan (how to ensure quality)
|
Step 8: Risk Management Plan (what can go wrong)
Prerequisites
Before generating any documents, gather or confirm:
| Input |
Source |
Required? |
| Project name & domain |
User interview |
Yes |
| Target market & users |
User interview |
Yes |
| Core feature list |
project-requirements output or user |
Yes |
| Tech stack decisions |
Project context or defaults |
Yes |
| Budget & timeline constraints |
User or stakeholder |
Recommended |
| Existing system inventory |
Codebase audit |
If migrating |
| Regulatory requirements |
User or domain research |
If applicable |
Cross-References to Existing Skills
Upstream Skills (use BEFORE this skill)
| Skill |
Relationship |
project-requirements |
Gathers raw requirements via guided interview. Feed its output (requirements.md, business-rules.md, user-types.md, workflows.md) into this skill's SRS and Vision documents. |
Parallel Skills (use ALONGSIDE this skill)
| Skill |
Relationship |
feature-planning |
For individual feature specs and implementation plans. This skill covers project-level planning; feature-planning covers feature-level planning. |
vibe-security-skill |
Security baseline for all web applications. Reference in QA Plan and Risk Plan. |
Downstream Skills (use AFTER this skill)
| Skill |
Relationship |
mobile-saas-planning |
For Android companion app planning (PRD, SDS, API Contract). Uses this skill's SRS as input. |
multi-tenant-saas-architecture |
Backend architecture patterns. Uses SDP and SRS as input. |
modular-saas-architecture |
Pluggable module architecture. Uses SRS module inventory. |
saas-seeder |
Bootstrap the SaaS template. Uses requirements from SRS. |
sdlc-design |
Design documentation phase. Uses approved SRS as primary input. |
sdlc-testing |
Testing documentation. Uses SRS requirement IDs for test case traceability. |
Future skills to add (identified from ISO/IEC 14764-2006): Software Maintenance Plan (Corrective/Adaptive/Perfective/Preventive maintenance types) and Post-Deployment Evaluation Report are not yet implemented as skills but should be generated at project close.
Available SDLC Skills
| Skill |
Phase |
Documents |
sdlc-design |
Design |
SDD, Database Design, API Design, UI/UX Spec |
sdlc-testing |
Testing |
Test Plan, Test Cases, V&V Plan, Test Report, Peer Review |
Available SDLC Skills (continued)
| Skill |
Phase |
Documents |
sdlc-user-deploy |
Delivery |
User Manual, Deployment Guide, Release Notes, Training Plan |
Adaptation Rules
SaaS vs Standalone
| Aspect |
Multi-Tenant SaaS |
Standalone App |
| Data isolation |
Row-level via franchise_id |
Not applicable |
| Auth model |
Dual auth (Session + JWT) |
Single auth model |
| Deployment |
3-env (dev/staging/prod) |
May be simpler |
| Scaling |
Per-tenant growth planning |
Single-instance scaling |
| SRS sections |
Include NFR-MT (multi-tenancy) |
Omit multi-tenancy NFRs |
| Risk register |
Include tenant data leakage risks |
Omit tenant-specific risks |
Android + Web vs Web-Only
| Aspect |
Android + Web |
Web-Only |
| SRS scope |
Include mobile NFRs (offline, app store) |
Web NFRs only |
| SDP |
Include Android build pipeline |
Web pipeline only |
| SCMP |
Include Gradle + PHP configs |
PHP configs only |
| QA Plan |
Include Android testing (Compose UI, JUnit 5) |
Web testing only |
| Risk Plan |
Include app store rejection risks |
Omit mobile risks |
MVP vs Full Product
| Aspect |
MVP |
Full Product |
| Vision scope |
P0 features only |
P0 + P1 + P2 features |
| SDP phases |
2-3 phases |
5-8 phases |
| SRS depth |
Core modules only |
All modules |
| Feasibility |
Focus on technical + economic |
All five feasibility types |
| Risk register |
Top 10 risks |
Comprehensive (20-30 risks) |
Output Structure
When generating documents for a project, create this structure:
docs/planning/
├── 01-feasibility-study.md
├── 02-project-vision-scope.md
├── 03-software-requirements-spec.md
├── 03-srs/
│ ├── functional-requirements.md
│ ├── non-functional-requirements.md
│ └── traceability-matrix.md
├── 04-software-development-plan.md
├── 05-configuration-management-plan.md
├── 06-quality-assurance-plan.md
└── 07-risk-management-plan.md
Each file must stay under 500 lines. Split into subdirectories as needed.
Phase Gate Exit Criteria
Every project passes through six risk-based milestones (Disciplined Agile, 2020). Each milestone has mandatory exit criteria verified before proceeding. These map to the six DA milestones.
| Gate |
DA Milestone |
Triggered By |
Exit Criteria |
| G1 |
Stakeholder Vision |
End of Skill 01–03 |
Vision documented; stakeholder register complete; scope agreed with Out of Scope listed; domain confirmed |
| G2 |
Proven Architecture |
End of Skill 04 |
Interface spec complete; architecture strategy selected; key risks identified; no unresolved [CONTEXT-GAP] tags |
| G3 |
Requirements Complete |
End of Skill 05 |
All FRs have GWT stubs; all NFRs have SMART metrics; every FR traced to business goal; zero [V&V-FAIL] tags |
| G4 |
Logic Validated |
End of Skill 06–07 |
All LaTeX formulas verified; attribute mapping complete; no conflicts in Section 3.4 |
| G5 |
Audit Passed |
End of Skill 08 |
Zero [V&V-FAIL], [GLOSSARY-GAP], [TRACE-GAP], [SMART-FAIL] tags; SRS approved by consultant |
| G6 |
Production Ready |
Post-testing |
Test plan complete; no open must-fix defects; Go/No-Go approved in phase exit meeting |
Anti-pattern: Advancing to the next gate without resolving all tags from the current gate propagates defects downstream. One unresolved [V&V-FAIL] at G3 typically generates 5–10 downstream rework items.
Quality Checklist
Run after generating all documents:
- All 7 documents generated (or justified why one was skipped)
- Each document stays under 500 lines (split if needed)
- Vision & Scope has measurable success metrics with numeric targets
- SRS has numbered requirement IDs (FR-MOD-001, NFR-PERF-001)
- SRS Section 1.2 includes an explicit
## Out of Scope subsection
- Every NFR is SMART: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound — flag
[V&V-FAIL: SMART metric not defined] for any that are not
- Every SHALL requirement has an inline acceptance stub:
**Acceptance:** Given [state], When [action], Then [outcome]
- Requirements are prioritized using MoSCoW; time-sensitive features additionally scored with Cost of Delay
- SDP references the correct tech stack with version numbers
- SCMP describes the actual Git branching strategy being used
- QA Plan references
vibe-security-skill for security quality gates
- Risk Register includes at least 8 pre-populated SaaS-specific risks
- Feasibility Study ends with a clear Go/No-Go/Conditional recommendation
- All documents cross-reference each other where relevant
- Multi-tenant isolation addressed in SRS, QA Plan, and Risk Plan
- Deployment environments (Windows dev, Ubuntu staging, Debian prod) documented in SDP
- Release, rollback, and post-deploy observation assumptions are documented in the plan set
- No vague language ("user-friendly", "fast", "secure") -- all measurable
- Examples are tailored to the project's actual tech stack and domain
Anti-Patterns (What NOT to Do)
| Anti-Pattern |
Why It Fails |
Do This Instead |
| Skip feasibility, jump to coding |
Wastes resources on unviable projects |
Always do feasibility first |
| Copy-paste generic templates |
Documents don't match your project |
Customize every section to your context |
| Write SRS without stakeholder input |
Requirements will be wrong |
Use project-requirements skill first |
| No measurable success metrics |
Can't tell if project succeeded |
Define KPIs with specific numeric targets |
| Ignore multi-tenant requirements |
Data leakage between tenants |
Always include NFR-MT requirements |
| One massive document |
Exceeds 500-line limit, hard to maintain |
Split into index + sub-files |
| No risk register |
Risks become surprises |
Pre-populate with common SaaS risks |
| Skip configuration management |
Deployment chaos, lost changes |
Document branching, releases, migrations |
| Write plans and never update them |
Plans become stale and useless |
Review and update at each phase gate |
| Omit Out of Scope section from SRS |
Scope creep is invisible |
SRS Section 1.2 must include explicit ## Out of Scope subsection |
| Vague NFRs without SMART metrics |
Cannot verify or test non-functional requirements |
Each NFR must be Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound |
| No Given-When-Then acceptance stubs |
Requirements written without verification linkage |
Add inline **Acceptance:** Given [state], When [action], Then [outcome] to every SHALL requirement |
| Prioritize only by gut feel |
High-value work delayed; delivery misaligned with business |
Use Cost of Delay (CoD) for time-sensitive requirements alongside MoSCoW |
Template Files
Each template provides the complete structure, section-by-section guidance, example excerpts, anti-patterns, and a quality checklist.
- Project Vision & Scope
- Software Development Plan
- Configuration Management Plan
- Quality Assurance Plan
- Risk Management Plan
- Software Requirements Specification
- Feasibility Study Report
References
Back to: Skills Repository
Related: project-requirements | feature-planning | mobile-saas-planning
Last Updated: 2026-03-15 (strengthened per Adjei 2023, Winston, Etter 2016, Cone 2023)