---
type: atlas-artifact
artifact_type: plan
project: "{{project}}"
status: draft
owner: "{{owner}}"
created: {{date}}
updated: {{date}}
source: "{{source}}"
reviewer: "{{reviewer|TBD}}"
tags: [atlas, artifact, plan]
---
# {{title}} Implementation Plan

Parent project: [[{{project}}]]
Source: {{source}}
Supersedes: {{supersedes|N/A}}

## Goal

One sentence describing what this plan will build or change.

## Non-goals

- Explicitly out of scope: ...

## Current state / context

- Existing behavior, files, constraints, and relevant prior decisions.
- Assumptions: ...

## Architecture approach

2-3 sentences explaining the design, boundaries, and why this is the smallest durable change.

## Files/tools to touch

- Create: `path/to/new-file`
- Modify: `path/to/existing-file`
- Commands/tools: `exact command`

## Task breakdown

### Task 1: {{small-task-name}}

Objective: one concrete 2-5 minute action.

Files:
- Modify: `exact/path`
- Test: `exact/test/path`

Step 1: Write the failing test or validation.

```bash
# exact command
```

Expected: describe the expected failure or signal.

Step 2: Implement the minimal change.

```text
# paste exact code/config or describe precise edit
```

Step 3: Verify.

```bash
# exact command
```

Expected: describe pass condition.

Step 4: Commit if practical.

```bash
git add exact/path exact/test/path
git commit -m "feat: add {{small-task-name}}"
```

## Tests and verification

- [ ] `exact command` -> expected result.
- [ ] Manual check: ...

## Rollback plan

- Revert commit or restore files: ...

## Risks and mitigations

- Risk: ... Mitigation: ...

## Next action

- Owner: ...
- Action: ...

## Plan-specific review checklist

- [ ] Tasks are ordered and bite-sized.
- [ ] File paths and commands are exact.
- [ ] Tests/verification prove acceptance criteria.
- [ ] Rollback is clear.

## Universal reviewer checklist

Before accepting this artifact, verify:

- [ ] Clear owner, status, date, source, and next action.
- [ ] Saved in the correct durable destination and named using the convention.
- [ ] Links back to the relevant project note and source task/issue/PR/session/incident.
- [ ] Claims are backed by evidence links, command output, or labeled assumptions.
- [ ] Risks, rollback, recovery, or revisit triggers are documented where relevant.
- [ ] No secrets, tokens, raw PII, private keys, or unredacted credentials are included.
- [ ] A new specialist can understand the artifact without rereading the whole chat.
