Implement
SkillDev toolsExecute an implementation plan, making changes and committing properly
Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.
No other account needed.
Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.
Then ask your AI: use the Implement skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by gittower/git-flow-next in .claude/skills/implement/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
Execute an implementation plan or review fixes, making code changes and committing according to guidelines.
Arguments
/implement [target]
Target (optional)
Specifies what to implement. Can be:
- Nothing - auto-detect from branch name, check for review.md then plan.md
- Directory name - folder within
.ai/(e.g.,issue-59-add-no-verify-option) - Relative path - path to
.ai/folder (e.g.,.ai/my-feature) - File path - direct path to a specific file (e.g.,
.ai/my-feature/review.md)
Source Priority
When given a directory (or auto-detecting):
- If
review.mdexists → implement fixes from the review - Otherwise if
plan.mdexists → implement the plan - If neither exists → suggest running
/create-planor/code-reviewfirst
Examples
# Auto-detect from branch, prefer review.md over plan.md
/implement
# Use specific folder in .ai/
/implement issue-59-add-no-verify-option
# Use relative path
/implement .ai/my-feature
# Use specific file directly
/implement .ai/my-feature/plan.md
/implement .ai/my-feature/review.md
Instructions
-
Parse Arguments and Find Source
If a file path was provided (ends with
.md):- Use that file directly
- Determine if it's a plan or review from filename
If a directory/folder was provided:
- If it starts with
.ai/, use it directly - Otherwise, treat it as a folder name within
.ai/ - Check for
review.mdfirst, thenplan.md
If no argument provided:
- Extract issue number from branch name (e.g.,
feature/59-...→59) - Look for existing
.ai/issue-<number>-*folder - Check for
review.mdfirst, thenplan.md
If no source file found:
- Suggest running
/create-planfor new work - Suggest running
/code-reviewif code exists but needs review
-
Verify Prerequisites
- Confirm on correct feature branch
- Check working directory is clean (
git status) - Ensure tests pass before starting:
go test ./...
-
Load Guidelines
- Read CODING_GUIDELINES.md for implementation standards
- Read COMMIT_GUIDELINES.md for commit format
- Read GIT_TEST_SCENARIOS.md when implementing tests (required for Git scenario setup)
-
Execute Work
For Plan Mode (implementing from plan.md)
Tests come first. The plan's Test Plan section was gated by
/validate-testsand is authoritative:- Confirm the plan was gated:
.ai/<folder>/codex-test-plan.mdexists. If not, stop and run/validate-testsfirst - Implement all Test Plan scenarios as tests before any production code
- Verify they fail for the right reason — missing behavior, not setup bugs — then commit the tests
- Only then work through the remaining implementation tasks
For each task in the plan:
Before Each Task:
- Review task requirements and identify all files to modify
- Read CODING_GUIDELINES.md rules relevant to the change
Code Changes:
- Make focused, atomic changes
- Follow existing patterns in the codebase
- Keep changes minimal — don't over-engineer
After Each Task:
- Verify build:
go build ./... - Run tests:
go test ./... - Review changes:
git diff
Test Immutability Rule (Plan Mode)
Tests MUST NOT be changed to make the implementation pass. If the implementation and a test disagree, the test plan is challenged — not quietly edited:
- Stop implementing. Re-read the spec/analysis and the Test Plan and determine which is wrong: the implementation approach (usual case — fix the implementation) or genuinely the test plan
- If the test plan must change: revise the Test Plan section, re-run
the
/validate-testsCodex gate on the revised plan, and append an entry to the plan's Test Plan Revisions section: what changed, why, revision count - Then update the affected tests to match the revised plan and continue
Abort rule: if this happens more than 3 times in one implementation, error out — stop all work, leave the branch as-is, and report to the user that the plan and implementation are fundamentally at odds and need human review. Do not attempt a fourth revision.
For Review Mode (implementing from review.md)
For each issue found in the review:
Must fix:
- Address all must-fix issues before continuing
- These prevent the PR from being merged
Should fix:
- Address should-fix items that improve code quality
- Document any intentionally skipped with rationale
Nit:
- Consider implementing if they improve the code
- Skip if they add unnecessary complexity
After Fixes:
- Verify build:
go build ./... - Run tests:
go test ./... - Review changes:
git diff
- Confirm the plan was gated:
-
Commit Strategy
When to Commit
- After completing a logical unit of work
- After each checkpoint in the plan (plan mode)
- After fixing a category of issues (review mode)
- Keep commits atomic and focused
- Use
/commitskill for proper formatting
-
Checkpoint Verification
At each checkpoint:
- Build succeeds:
go build ./... - Tests pass:
go test ./... - Expected behavior works
- Changes committed
- Build succeeds:
-
Track Progress
For plan mode - update plan.md checkboxes:
- [x] Completed task - [ ] Pending taskFor review mode - update review.md checkboxes:
- [x] Fixed: <issue description> - [ ] Pending: <issue description> -
Handle Issues
If problems arise:
- Document the issue
- Check if it affects the plan/review
- Adjust approach if needed
- Ask for clarification if blocked
Completion
For Plan Mode:
- Verify all tests pass
- Check all checkboxes in plan.md are complete
- Suggest running
/code-reviewbefore PR
For Review Mode:
- Verify all tests pass
- Check all blocking issues are resolved
- Update review.md with fixes applied
- Ready for PR if all blocking issues fixed
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 439
- Forks
- 28
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
- Hacker News mentions
- 20
Advanced
- Catalog kind
- skill
- Gateway key
implement-gittower- Source
- github.com/gittower/git-flow-next