Back to skills
SKILL.md
Structured Dev Cycle
ASecurity6-stage structured development cycle with stage-based tool restrictions
- 43 stars
- 0 votes
- 0 copies
- 1 view
- Added September 9, 2026
Works with
Security analysis
100/100npx -y skills add baekenough/oh-my-customcode --skill structured-dev-cycle --agent claude-codeAre you the author of Structured Dev Cycle?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/baekenough-structured-dev-cycle)---
name: structured-dev-cycle
description: 6-stage structured development cycle with stage-based tool restrictions
scope: core
version: 1.0.0
user-invocable: true
---
# Structured Development Cycle
A disciplined 6-stage development cycle that enforces quality through stage-based tool restrictions. Prevents premature implementation by requiring planning and verification phases.
## Background
Inspired by Pi Coding Agent Workflow Extension's structured development approach. The core insight: restricting file modification tools during planning phases forces thorough analysis before code changes.
## Stages
| # | Stage | Allowed Tools | Blocked Tools | Purpose |
|---|-------|---------------|---------------|---------|
| 1 | **Plan** | Read, Glob, Grep, WebSearch, WebFetch | Write, Edit, Bash (modifying) | Define approach, analyze requirements |
| 2 | **Verify Plan** | Read, Glob, Grep | Write, Edit, Bash | Review plan from different perspective |
| 3 | **Implement** | All tools | None | Write code, create files |
| 4 | **Verify Implementation** | Read, Glob, Grep, Bash (tests only) | Write, Edit | Review code, run tests |
| 5 | **Compound** | Read, Bash (tests only) | Write, Edit | Integration testing, cross-module validation |
| 6 | **Done** | Read | Write, Edit, Bash | Summary and documentation |
### Stage Model Recommendations
Following the [reasoning-sandwich](/skills/reasoning-sandwich) pattern:
| Stage | Recommended Model | Rationale |
|-------|------------------|-----------|
| 1: Plan | opus | Architectural reasoning, requirement analysis |
| 2: Verify Plan | opus | Edge case detection, alternative evaluation |
| 3: Implement | sonnet | Code generation, file creation optimized |
| 4: Verify Implementation | sonnet | Test execution, structural review |
| 5: Compound | sonnet | Integration testing, cross-module validation |
| 6: Done | haiku | Checklist validation, summary generation |
Model selection is advisory — the orchestrator may override based on task complexity.
## Stage Tracking
Stage state is tracked via a marker file for hook enforcement:
```bash
# Set stage (used by orchestrator or skill)
echo "plan" > /tmp/.claude-dev-stage-$PPID
# Valid stage values (all block Write/Edit except 'implement'):
# plan, verify-plan, implement, verify-impl, compound, done
# Clear stage (disable blocking)
rm -f /tmp/.claude-dev-stage-$PPID
```
A PreToolUse hook in `.claude/hooks/hooks.json` checks this marker and blocks Write/Edit tools during non-implementation stages.
## Workflow
### Stage 1: Plan
```
[Stage 1/6: Plan]
├── Analyze requirements and constraints
├── Read existing code for context
├── Search for related patterns
├── Define approach with rationale
└── Output: Implementation plan document
```
**Exit criteria**: Clear plan with file list, approach description, and risk assessment.
### Stage 2: Verify Plan
```
[Stage 2/6: Verify Plan]
├── Review plan for completeness
├── Check for missing edge cases
├── Validate against existing patterns
├── Consider alternative approaches
└── Output: Plan approval or revision requests
```
**Exit criteria**: Plan verified by different perspective (ideally different model via multi-model-verification).
### Stage 3: Implement
```
[Stage 3/6: Implement]
├── Follow verified plan
├── Create/modify files as specified
├── Write tests alongside code
├── Track deviations from plan
└── Output: Implementation complete
```
**Exit criteria**: All planned files created/modified, tests written.
### Stage 4: Verify Implementation
```
[Stage 4/6: Verify Implementation]
├── Run test suite
├── Review code quality
├── Check for plan deviations
├── Validate error handling
└── Output: Verification report
```
**Exit criteria**: All tests pass, no critical issues found. If issues found, return to Stage 3.
### Stage 5: Compound
```
[Stage 5/6: Compound]
├── Run integration tests
├── Cross-module validation
├── Check for side effects
├── Verify documentation accuracy
└── Output: Integration report
```
**Exit criteria**: No integration issues. If issues found, return to Stage 3.
### Stage 6: Done
```
[Stage 6/6: Done]
├── Summarize changes made
├── List files modified
├── Note any deviations from plan
├── Suggest follow-up tasks
└── Output: Completion summary
```
## Integration
### With EnterPlanMode
Stage 1 (Plan) maps to Claude Code's `EnterPlanMode`. When the structured cycle is active:
- EnterPlanMode triggers Stage 1
- ExitPlanMode transitions to Stage 2 (Verify Plan), not directly to implementation
### With Multi-Model Verification
Stage 2 (Verify Plan) and Stage 4 (Verify Implementation) can invoke the `multi-model-verification` skill for comprehensive review.
### With PreToolUse Hooks
The stage marker file (`/tmp/.claude-dev-stage-$PPID`) is read by a PreToolUse hook that enforces tool restrictions. This provides a safety net beyond instruction-based compliance.
### With Agent Teams
For complex tasks, Agent Teams is **preferred** when available (R018):
- Plan: architect agent
- Verify: reviewer agent(s) — multi-model-verification via Agent Teams
- Implement: domain expert agent
- Compound: QA agent
When Agent Teams is enabled AND task involves 3+ agents or review→fix cycles, using Agent Teams is MANDATORY per R018.
## When to Use
| Task Complexity | Recommended Cycle |
|----------------|-------------------|
| Simple fix (< 3 files) | Skip — direct implementation |
| Medium feature (3-10 files) | Stages 1, 3, 4, 6 (skip verify plan, compound) |
| Complex feature (10+ files) | Full 6-stage cycle |
| Architecture change | Full 6-stage cycle with multi-model verification |
| Security-critical code | Full 6-stage cycle (mandatory) |
## Stage Transition Commands
```bash
# Orchestrator manages transitions:
echo "plan" > /tmp/.claude-dev-stage-$PPID # Enter planning
echo "verify-plan" > /tmp/.claude-dev-stage-$PPID # Enter plan verification
echo "implement" > /tmp/.claude-dev-stage-$PPID # Enter implementation
echo "verify-impl" > /tmp/.claude-dev-stage-$PPID # Enter impl verification
echo "compound" > /tmp/.claude-dev-stage-$PPID # Enter compound testing
echo "done" > /tmp/.claude-dev-stage-$PPID # Mark done
rm -f /tmp/.claude-dev-stage-$PPID # Clear (disable blocking)
```
## Limitations
- **Session scoping**: The marker path is scoped by parent PID (`/tmp/.claude-dev-stage-$PPID`), so concurrent Claude Code sessions use distinct markers and do not conflict. The reader hooks (`stage-blocker.sh`, `task-state-precompact.sh`) and the writer commands above all resolve `$PPID` to the same Claude Code process, keeping the gate consistent.
- **World-writable path**: The `/tmp/` directory is accessible to all users. The `-$PPID` suffix isolates per-session state but does not restrict filesystem permissions; avoid storing sensitive data in the marker file.
## Permission Mode
When spawning agents via the Agent tool during this skill's execution, always pass `mode: "bypassPermissions"`. The Agent tool default (`acceptEdits`) overrides agent frontmatter `permissionMode`, causing permission prompts during unattended execution.
## Display Format
```
═══ Structured Dev Cycle ═══════════════════════════
[■■□□□□] Stage 2/6: Verify Plan
Files planned: 5 | Risks identified: 2
═════════════════════════════════════════════════════
```
Attribution
Comments
Loading comments…