AutoGineer summary
Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author
Visual-plan is a structured planning framework for coding agents that moves beyond simple chat-based text. It enables the creation of rich, reviewable documents that include inline diagrams, file maps, annotated code, and interactive UI surfaces. By using a dedicated Plan MCP connector, it provides a persistent, shareable, and annotatable workspace for complex tasks, ensuring that architecture, UI, and product decisions are clearly communicated and approved before implementation begins.
What it does
- Converts text-based plans into interactive visual documents.
- Supports multiple review modes including UI-first, prototype-first, and design-first.
- Integrates wireframes, diagrams, and code snippets directly into the plan.
- Provides a structured format for open questions and decision tracking.
- Enables collaborative feedback loops via a hosted Plan surface.
- Maintains a clear separation between planning and implementation phases.
When to use it
- For non-trivial tasks requiring alignment on architecture, data flow, or UI direction.
- When a plan needs to be shared, reviewed, or approved by stakeholders.
- For UI-heavy work where visual wireframes or prototypes clarify the user experience.
- When an existing text plan needs to be elevated into a richer, more structured artifact.
- For complex, multi-file, or risky projects that benefit from visual documentation.
Advantages
- Creates a single, persistent source of truth for project direction.
- Reduces ambiguity by providing visual context for abstract concepts.
- Facilitates structured feedback and approval before writing code.
- Improves clarity for complex architecture and data-model decisions.
- Keeps documentation and visual mockups tightly coupled with the plan.
Usage examples
- “Create a visual plan for the new user onboarding flow.”
- The agent generates a structured plan with a top-level canvas showing wireframes for each onboarding step, followed by a document detailing the implementation logic.
- “I have a text plan for the backend API refactor, can you turn it into a visual plan?”
- The agent imports the existing text, structures it into a formal plan with diagrams and API-endpoint blocks, and publishes it to the Plan surface for review.
Install
Download the skill as a ZIP:
https://mp-staging.autogineer.com/agent-skills/builderio/visual-plan/downloadUnzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:
mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip visual-plan.zip -d .agents/skills
Documentation by Builder.io
Agent-Native Plans
Agent-Native Plans is structured visual planning mode for coding agents. Build the plan you would normally write in Markdown, but as a scannable document with editable blocks mixed in: inline diagrams, code snippets, open questions, and an optional top visual review area (wireframe canvas, live prototype, or both in tabs). Architecture and backend plans stay document-only; UI and product plans start with the top canvas/prototype (the Visual Surface Choice section owns that rule).
/visual-plan is the packaged command and main entry point. Choose the review
mode from the task: UI-first when the work is primarily product UI and review
should start with screens, prototype-first when review should start with a
functional live prototype, design-first when review needs full-fidelity branded
screens, or visual-intake when the user explicitly wants a questionnaire before
planning. When a Codex, Claude Code, Markdown, or pasted plan already exists,
/visual-plan uses that source plan as the starting point and builds the review
surface from it instead of starting over.
When To Use
Create or adapt a visual plan whenever the plan would be better as a reviewable artifact than a chat paragraph. This includes modest work such as a single UI surface with states, a small workflow, a before/after product change, or a component/API/data-shape decision that needs alignment, plus larger multi-file, ambiguous, long-running, risky, or UI-heavy work. Use it when architecture / data flow / UI direction / options / open questions would benefit from inline diagrams or structured blocks, when the user needs to react to a direction before you implement, or when an existing text plan needs a richer review surface.
Plan Discipline
Gate thoughtfully. A visual plan is a richer review surface, not only a tool for giant projects. Use it when the user needs to see, compare, comment on, or approve a direction before code, even for a modest UI/state/workflow change. Skip it for truly trivial, unambiguous work — typos, one-line fixes, a single well-specified function, anything whose diff you could describe in one sentence — and just make the change. Never pad a plan with filler and never ship a single-step plan.
Research before you draft. Read the real files, actions, schema, and patterns first; name actual files, symbols, and data shapes instead of inventing them. Check existing
actions/before proposing endpoints and prefer named client helpers over raw fetch. Delegate wide exploration to a sub-agent. Lead with reuse: for each step, name what it reuses — existing actions, schema, components, helpers — before what it adds, so the plan explains the genuinely new delta instead of redescribing what already exists.Decide the hard-to-reverse bets first. For non-trivial backend, data, or API work, sketch where the feature is headed, then call out the decisions that are expensive to undo once data or callers depend on them — wire format, public ids, data-model shape, auth and ownership boundaries — and get those right in the plan even if most of the feature ships later. Then scope to the smallest first cut that proves the approach without foreclosing it, stating both what is in and what is explicitly deferred.
Keep examples at the right altitude. When the user's idea is a broad framework, product, or operating-model change, do not collapse it into the first concrete example, provider, or sync path they mention. Separate the core abstraction from motivating examples and app/provider adapters. Use examples to make the plan legible, but label them as examples unless they are the whole requested scope.
Publish standalone plans. If the user pasted, referenced, or already has a Codex / Claude Code / Markdown plan, treat it as source material, but rewrite the published plan as a clean standalone proposal. Preserve the source plan's useful intent and codebase facts, label inferred visuals as inferred, and avoid revision language such as "preserve the prior plan", "do not drop the old idea", "unlike the previous version", or "this revision changes...". A reader who never saw the chat or earlier drafts should understand the plan.
Make the first read concrete. If the plan is meant to be shared with someone outside the chat, or if the concept is abstract, lead near the top with one concrete product example before mode tables, architecture, or roadmaps. For UI-capable concepts, that usually means a top-canvas app state that shows the real user workflow in product terms. Do not rely on phrases that only make sense in conversation, and do not frame the plan as "not the old idea"; state the positive model directly.
Planning is read-only. Make no source edits while building or reviewing the plan. Start editing only after the user approves the direction.
Clarify vs. assume. Do not ask how to build it — explore and present the approach and options in the plan. Ask a clarifying question only when an ambiguity would change the design and you cannot resolve it from the code; use the host agent's normal ask-user-question flow and batch 2-4 high-leverage questions before finalizing. Do not call
create-visual-questionsfor ordinary clarification or preflight; reserve it for the visual-intake mode when the user explicitly asks for a visual intake questionnaire. Otherwise state the assumption explicitly and proceed, and keep anything unresolved in the plan's single bottomquestion-formOpen Questions block. For complex plans, do a final open-question pass before handoff: if a decision would affect architecture, scope, UX, data shape, or rollout, either decide it in the plan with rationale or put it in that bottom form with a recommended default.The plan is the approval gate. After surfacing it, ask the user to review and approve before you write code, and name which files/areas the work touches. Presenting the plan and requesting sign-off is the approval step — do not ask a separate "does this look good?" question.
The document is the source of truth, not the chat. When scope shifts, update the plan with
update-visual-planrather than only changing course in chat, and make the updated document stand alone. Do not describe the update as a correction to an earlier draft inside the plan itself. Re-read the approved plan before major steps.
Create A Structured Agent-Native Plan — Never Inline
The deliverable is ALWAYS a structured Agent-Native Plan, not a chat-only plan.
The hosted Plan MCP connector (plan server, or legacy agent-native-plans) is
the default collaboration and commenting surface; it is not a reason to reject
the planning pattern as an external dependency or rented layer. Plans are
portable source artifacts (plan.mdx, optional canvas.mdx /
prototype.mdx, JSON, and HTML export), and ownership-sensitive workflows can
use local-files mode or a self-hosted/custom Plan app URL without abandoning the
skill's review discipline. Do not advise the user to skip /visual-plan because
the default surface is hosted; choose the right Plan mode for the user's
ownership, privacy, sharing, and branding needs.
By default, create the plan via the Plan MCP connector and NEVER hand it over as
inline chat content — no Markdown prose, ASCII sketch, table, or fenced
wireframe. If the plan (or legacy agent-native-plans) tools are not visible,
discover them through the host's tool_search first; if they are still missing,
STOP and give the user the client-specific reconnect step rather than improvising
an inline plan. Before publishing, or whenever a connector or auth error appears,
READ references/connection.md in this skill directory — it is the single source
of truth for the never-inline rule, connector discovery, and the per-client
reconnect steps. Local-files privacy mode (after Tool Guidance) is the exception.
Core Workflow
This section describes the default hosted Plan MCP workflow. If
AGENT_NATIVE_PLANS_MODE=local-files is set, or the user asks for fully local
files/no hosted Plan writes, use Local-Files Privacy Mode instead; carry
forward only the code-research and plan-composition guidance here.
Follow the host agent's normal planning flow: inspect the codebase, delegate wide exploration when useful, gather the info needed, and ask native clarifying questions as needed before generating the plan. If a source plan already exists, gather its exact text from the user's paste, a referenced file, or recent visible agent context; do not invent source text.
Call
get-plan-blocksfor the authoritative block catalog — do not author from memorized tags. Then call the mode-matched create tool:create-visual-planfor document-first plans (architecture, backend, data, refactor, API),create-ui-planfor UI-first plans,create-prototype-planfor prototype-first plans,create-plan-designfor design-first plans,create-visual-questionsonly when the user explicitly asks for a visual intake questionnaire. When a source plan already exists, pass it asplanTextand preserve the original plan's useful intent while producing a standalone plan document, not a revision memo.For UI/product plans, compose the top canvas first with the primary wireframes and annotated states, then write the document with native blocks (see
references/canvas.mdandreferences/document-quality.md). For broad product architecture plans with a user-facing implication, add a concrete "what this looks like in the app" visual before the abstract architecture or mode tables. Keep the document close to the standalone Markdown plan the agent would normally output. If an existing plan was provided, carry forward the right facts and decisions without referring to the previous draft or explaining how this version differs. For non-visual plans, skip the top visual surface (Visual Surface Choice below owns the rule) and putdiagram,data-model,api-endpoint,diff,file-tree,code, andannotated-codeblocks directly next to the relevant prose. Wide document layout is renderer-owned and intentionally allowlisted: only literal code-review surfaces (diff,annotated-code) andtabsblocks with vertical orientation or diff-like children break out wider than prose. Keepapi-endpoint,openapi-spec,data-model,json-explorer,wireframe, question, andcustom-htmlblocks in normal document flow unless their own renderer says otherwise.Surface the returned Plans link or inline MCP App and ask the user to review. Always include the actual URL in chat so the next step is a click in CLI or other text-only hosts. When the host exposes an embedded browser/preview panel and a tool can open arbitrary URLs there, open the returned plan URL automatically for convenient review — a convenience and smoke test, never the only handoff or the access model. Plans should load out of the box for the local agent and local browser session; if a signed-in embedded browser cannot read a local plan that an anonymous/tool check can read, fix the app/action ownership or access path rather than patching one plan by hand. For high-stakes plans (architecture, backend, data, multi-file, or risky), also kick off the self-review pass in Self-Review Before Handoff while the user reads, instead of blocking the handoff on it.
For hosted plans, call
get-plan-feedbackbefore editing, after review, after any long pause, and before the final response. TreatanchorDetails, resolver intent, recent review events, and any focused screenshots from browser handoff as the source of truth for exactly what changed and exactly what each comment points at.For hosted plans, apply changes with
update-visual-plan, preferring targetedcontentPatches. Treat the top-levelcontentpayload as a full replacement, not a merge; do not send a partialcontentobject to add a canvas or one block. If a full replacement orreplace-blocksis unavoidable, callget-visual-planimmediately before the write, pass itsplan.updatedAtasexpectedUpdatedAt, and carry forward every existing block and visual surface. Never reuse a revision from an earlier read or feedback payload. For source-control friendly edits, use granularpatch-visual-plan-sourceoperations against the MDX files instead of regenerating the plan;replace-fileis also destructive and requires the same freshexpectedUpdatedAtfence.After every hosted-plan write, call
get-visual-planagain and compare the persisted text, block IDs/counts, canvas frames, and prototype with the intended result. A successful mutation response is not proof that unrelated content survived. If the edit addressed agent-targeted feedback, only after this verification callresolve-plan-commentfor the thread andconsume-plan-feedbackfor its comments; do both so addressed feedback is neither visibly open nor returned as pending work.For hosted plans, export with
export-visual-planonly when the user wants a shareable receipt or repo-check-in artifacts.
Self-Review Before Handoff
This adversarial self-review pass is opt-in, not default: run it only for high-stakes plans — irreversible migrations, security-sensitive work, or when the user explicitly asks for extra rigor — and skip it otherwise. It roughly doubles the cost of plan generation, so the default for small, UI-only, single-decision, or ordinary plans is to skip it, not to run it. Keep the pass cheap and non-blocking when it does run:
Surface the plan first, review concurrently. Post the link and let the user start reading, then run the review in parallel — never make the user wait on it.
Review the written plan; do not re-research. Critique the plan text and its own blocks. The grounding was already done while drafting, so the review checks the output instead of re-exploring the repo.
Spawn one skeptical reviewer whose only job is to find what is weak, missing, or wrong — not to praise. Point it at: hard-to-reverse decisions made implicitly or not at all (wire format, public ids, data-model shape, auth, ownership); steps not anchored in real files or symbols; a menu of options where the plan should commit to one; obvious missing decisions ("what happens when X?", "why not Y?"); and padding or single-step filler.
Fix vs. ask. Apply clear-cut fixes yourself with
update-visual-plancontentPatches— vague non-goals, unanchored claims, an obvious missing decision. Route genuine judgment calls back to the user instead: add them to the bottomquestion-formOpen Questions block or batch them into the normal ask-user-question flow. Do not silently decide them.Do not surprise the user mid-read. On a large plan, apply the patches before the editor loads; otherwise note briefly that a self-review is running so the plan changing under them is expected. When you next respond, summarize what the review changed and what it surfaced for the user to decide.
Visual Surface Choice
Choose the surface before creating the plan or after reading the source plan. Do not add visual chrome by default:
For UI/product plans, the top canvas is usually the primary review surface. Put
the first meaningful wireframes there, not buried as document-body blocks. Use
multiple canvas artboards when states matter, such as the default view, an
overflow menu or popover, a side panel, loading, or error. Put short annotations
beside frames with targetId plus placement; keep implementation details,
tradeoffs, file maps, data contracts, risks, and verification in the document
body below the canvas.
When the user asks for a flow, storyboard, journey, wireframe, canvas, or "what
this looks like", treat that as a canvas-first request. Make one artboard per
user-visible state, connect only adjacent transitions, and use short canvas
annotations for the product notes. Do not substitute a document-body diagram
block for the requested storyboard just because HTML diagrams are faster to
write; diagrams belong below the canvas for backend mechanics, architecture, or
data-flow explanation.
Keep product wireframes and explanatory/meta diagrams separate. Start with pure screens that look like the app state under discussion, without callout prose or architecture notes embedded inside the UI. Put arrows, labels, contracts, data flow, and mode explanations in separate annotations, separate canvas diagrams, or the document body.
When the plan touches an existing app, inspect the current shell/components before drawing. The first artboard should look like the real app at the same density: existing sidebars, toolbar placement, overflow menus, app chrome, and framework agent chrome stay in their real places. Model secondary surfaces as separate states, such as a top-right overflow popover, sheet, panel, loading state, or separate AgentSidebar, rather than inventing a permanent inspector or folding framework chrome into the product UI.
No visual surface for architecture-only, backend-only, data migration, copy-only, or otherwise non-visual plans. Do not use the top canvas for architecture diagrams, dependency maps, file plans, API contracts, or data-flow-only reviews. Use a strong document with local inline diagrams only when relationships need a visual explanation, usually one spatial diagram per recommendation or decision. Prefer grouped regions, layers, quadrants, matrices, or before/after panels over a single-axis chain unless the relationship is truly sequential.
Canvas only for one static screen, a before/after comparison, a component state, a small popover, or a visual direction that does not require clicking. Put those wireframes in
content.canvasand omitcontent.prototype.Canvas + prototype for multi-step UI flows, onboarding, wizards, review/approval flows, navigation changes, or anything where the reviewer needs to operate the behavior. Keep the static wireframes in
content.canvas, add the aligned functional prototype incontent.prototype, and rely on the top visual tabs to switch between them. When both surfaces are present, open the Wireframes tab by default; the prototype remains available as the interactive follow-up view.Default to wireframes. A clean, minimal UI, a high UX bar, or references to Linear/Vercel describe the content and density bar; they do not request full-fidelity design mode. Use renderer-owned wireframes unless the user explicitly asks for branded, pixel-accurate, production-like, or full visual design. This keeps every canvas screen inspectable and its full content visible.
Prototype-first when the user asks to operate the UI or when interaction is the main question. Use
create-prototype-plan, which still preserves static mocks where useful.
For mixed canvas + prototype plans, reuse labels and IDs; patch surfaces together unless explicitly single-surface. For output audits, read the observability skill: support single-app and workspace tables, preserve app previews, and keep audit, synthesis, diffs, and applying changes admin-gated.
Treat “higher fidelity,” “pixel-accurate,” “polished mockup,” “production-like,”
“real design,” and “not a sketch/wireframe” as design-first language even when
the request also says “mockup.” For a new plan, use create-plan-design. For
an existing plan, keep the same plan id and call update-visual-plan with a
set-visual-render-mode patch using renderMode: "design" plus the upgraded
screen HTML/CSS in the same update. Ground the result in the real app shell,
tokens, typography, spacing, and states, and add stable data-design-id
targets. Put scoped styles in each screen's css field, never in a <style>
tag. The viewer-local Clean toggle only changes one browser's wireframe
preference; it is not a fidelity upgrade. Do not create a duplicate plan to
handle a fidelity follow-up.
Wireframe quality — read references/wireframe.md
UI recap/plan wireframes must meet a strict quality bar — full-width chrome,
pinned bottom bars, real product content, before/after comparability, the right
surface preset, --wf-* tokens instead of hex, and no <html>/<style>/font
tags. Before authoring ANY wireframe / <Screen> / WireframeBlock, READ
references/wireframe.md in this skill directory — it is the single source of
truth for HTML wireframe quality, shared word for word with /visual-plan
and /visual-recap. Do not author wireframes from memory.
Canvas — read references/canvas.md
The canvas is the single source of truth for static UI mockups: the surface
locks each artboard's footprint, mixed surfaces lay out
in lanes, annotations are plain-text designer notes anchored by
targetId/placement, and edits are surgical contentPatches. Before
authoring or editing ANY canvas, artboard, or annotation, READ
references/canvas.md in this skill directory — it is the single source of truth
for canvas/artboard mechanics. Do not author canvas layouts from memory.
Canvas artboards use the same HTML wireframe path as document-body
WireframeBlock screens: author <Screen surface="..." html={...} /> with a
semantic HTML fragment. Do not author fresh kit-tree children such as
<FrameScreen>, <Card>, <Row>, or <Btn> inside canvas <Screen> tags;
those are legacy compatibility markup for old plans and produce brittle canvas
layouts.
Document quality — read references/document-quality.md
The document is a serious technical plan, not marketing: outcome-first,
prose-first, self-contained, built from the right native blocks, with open
questions in a single bottom question-form and a pre-handoff visual check.
Before authoring the plan document, READ references/document-quality.md in this
skill directory — it is the single source of truth for the document quality bar.
Do not write the document from memory.
Good vs. bad exemplar — read references/exemplar.md
For a worked example of the bar — a great UI-first plan and /visual-plan, plus
the anti-patterns to avoid — READ references/exemplar.md in this skill
directory before authoring a plan.
Authoring invariants
Treat these as data-integrity checks, not optional polish:
contentis a complete replacement. Pass eithercontentor the mode's convenience arrays (screens/transitionsorstates/components), never both. The create actions reject mixed sources so a second payload cannot silently discard CSS, frames, or document blocks.A design screen's scoped
cssis part of the artifact. Keep it on both the prototype screen and its matching canvas frame, and use renderer-owned--wf-*tokens for portable color and typography.Rich-text
data.markdownmust contain actual runtime line breaks. Do not hand a plan a one-line Markdown value containing literal\nescape text, which renders the whole section as one heading. Escaped newlines are fine in code examples when the surrounding Markdown still has real line breaks.Canvas artboards do not scroll. Keep wireframe HTML in natural flow and set a larger frame
heightwhen a screen exceeds the surface preset; preserve the surface width and inspect the bottom edge at default zoom before handoff.After every hosted write, re-read the structured content and inspect the live Plan surface. A valid JSON payload is not proof that CSS loaded or Markdown rendered into the intended heading, paragraph, and list structure.
Tool Guidance
create-visual-plan: start one structured visual plan per agent task/run, or import an existing text plan by passingplanText;contentmay include no visual surface, canvas only, or canvas + prototype.create-ui-plan: start a UI-first plan when the work is primarily product UI.create-prototype-plan: start a prototype-first plan with a functional top review surface. If the interaction itself must also be high fidelity, set each screen'srenderModetodesignand pass scoped styles throughcss; otherwise usecreate-plan-designfor design-first review.create-plan-design: start a full-fidelity branded Design-tab plan with an optional matching Prototype tab.convert-visual-plan-to-prototype: convert an existing HTML wireframe canvas into a prototype plan.create-visual-questions: use only when the user explicitly asks for a visual intake questionnaire, not as/visual-planpreflight.update-visual-plan: revise content, status, or comments with targetedcontentPatches(see Core Workflow steps 6-7). Useset-visual-render-modewithrenderMode: "design"when promoting an existing plan to high fidelity, together with deliberate screen HTML/CSS; render mode alone only removes sketch treatment.replace-blocksand fullcontentreplacement requireexpectedUpdatedAtfrom a freshget-visual-plancall.read-visual-plan-source: read the normalized plan asplan.mdx, optionalcanvas.mdx, optional.plan-state.json, and JSON.patch-visual-plan-source: apply granular MDX AST patches by stable block, artboard, annotation, component, or wireframe-node id. Prefer those targeted operations;replace-filerequiresexpectedUpdatedAtfrom a freshget-visual-plancall.import-visual-plan-source: create or replace a plan from an MDX folder.get-visual-plan: read the current structured plan, exported HTML, annotations, andplan.updatedAt; it also returns the MDX folder for source workflows. Re-read immediately before a destructive write for its concurrency fence and again after every write to verify persisted state.get-plan-feedback: read unconsumed human feedback. Use it frequently; it returns grouped threads, exact anchor details, expected resolver, and recent review-event payloads so agents can act only on the comments meant for them.get-plan-blocks: resolve block tags before authoring — do not memorize tags; call this first to get the authoritative tag names, required fields, and prop shapes from the live block registry.export-visual-plan: export HTML, Markdown fallback, structured JSON, and MDX files for repo check-in.
When the user critiques a plan's look or structure, fix the renderer or this skill — never hand-edit one stored plan. Turn feedback into better guidance.
Local-Files Privacy Mode — read references/local-files.md
When the user wants no hosted Plan database writes — no DB writes, no Plan MCP
publish, fully local/offline/private planning, repo-owned source-controlled
artifacts, or AGENT_NATIVE_PLANS_MODE=local-files — do not call any hosted Plan
tool except the schema-only get-plan-blocks catalog lookup. Author a local MDX
folder and
preview it with plan local check / plan local serve / plan local verify.
Before using local-files mode, READ references/local-files.md in this skill
directory — it is the single source of truth for the full contract (catalog
lookup, MDX folder layout, the local bridge commands, and the hosted tools you
must not call). Carry forward only the code-research and plan-composition
guidance from Core Workflow; everything hosted is replaced by the local bridge.
Interpreting comment anchors
This section applies to hosted plans with get-plan-feedback /
update-visual-plan. In local-files mode, do not call hosted feedback or update
tools; interpret file/chat feedback directly, edit the MDX files, rerun the
local bridge check/serve/verify command, and report the new local URL.
get-plan-feedback returns rich anchors — read them before acting on any comment.
Coordinate frames.
targetX/targetYare percentages within the element named bytargetSelector/targetKind. Barex/yare percentages of the whole plan document.canvasX/canvasYare raw board-world pixels on the design canvas (board size given when available).Wireframe pins. Anchors on wireframes include
targetNodeIdandtargetNodePath(e.g.card > list > listItem "Acme Inc") identifying the exact kit node. UsetargetNodeIddirectly with wireframe node patch ops; usedata-design-idvalues from design artboards withupdate-design-element-style. Prefer the node id/path over raw coordinates; fall back to coordinates plus the focused screenshot (red ring marks the exact point) only when no node id is present.Text quotes. Resolve
textQuoteagainst current prose usingcontextBefore/contextAfterfor disambiguation. Ifambiguous: true, ask the user — do not guess which occurrence is meant.Detached comments.
get-plan-feedbackflags threads whose quoted text no longer exists asdetached(indetachedThreads). Reconcile these against rewritten content — never silently drop them.Routing.
resolutionTargetis the only routing signal: act onagent, treathumanas context only.@mentionsare people to notify, never a routing signal.Two-axis state. Mark every ingested comment as consumed (
consumedCommentIdsonupdate-visual-plan). Setstatus=resolvedonly on agent-targeted comments you actually addressed; leave human-targeted comments open. When an edit addresses feedback, first re-read the persisted plan and verify the requested change. Only then callresolve-plan-commentfor the addressed thread andconsume-plan-feedbackfor its comments; never mark addressed feedback along only one axis.
Visibility & Sharing
Use set-resource-visibility to change who can see a plan (e.g. public, login,
or org-scoped). Use share-resource to grant specific users or roles access
by email or role. Gate visibility before sharing any plan that covers
unreleased or private work — default to the narrowest scope that meets the
review need.
Setup & Authentication
There are two ways into Plans.
Coding agent (CLI). Install once with the Agent-Native CLI. The command installs the Plans skills, registers the hosted Plans MCP connector, and runs auth/setup for the selected local client(s) in the same step (a one-time browser sign-in at setup — this is intended), so the first tool call in that client does not hit an OAuth wall:
npx @agent-native/core@latest skills add visual-plansAfter that, /visual-plan, /visual-recap, and /visualize-repo are the
installed slash commands. If you only need one command, use
skills add visual-plan, skills add visual-recap, or
skills add visualize-repo instead. The other planning modes
(create-ui-plan, create-prototype-plan, create-plan-design,
create-visual-questions) are MCP tools reachable from /visual-plan, not
separate slash commands. Pass --no-connect to register the connector without
authenticating, then run
npx @agent-native/core@latest connect https://plan.agent-native.com --client all
whenever you are ready, or choose a narrower --client. Auth and MCP tool
loading are per client config/session.
Browser (people you share with). Open the Plans editor and create & edit with no sign-up — you work as a guest. Sign in only when you want to save or share; signing in claims the plans you made as a guest into your account.
Sharing and commenting require an account: public/shared plans are viewable by anyone with the link, but commenting on them needs an agent-native account.
For fully offline, no-account use, run the Plans app locally and sync plans to your repo as MDX. This local mode is a separate advanced path, not the default hosted flow.
For repo-wide visual docs, run
npx @agent-native/core@latest visualize-repo --open to create/update
agent-native.json, seed .agent-native/visual-docs/repo-overview, and open
the local bridge.
If a Plans tool returns needs auth, Unauthorized, or Session terminated, do
not keep retrying it — stop and give the user the per-client reconnect step from
references/connection.md, then continue once the connector is available.
Hosted default: connect https://plan.agent-native.com/mcp. Do
not put shared secrets in skill files.
Files
- ATTRIBUTION.mdAdded by AutoGineer847 B
- LICENSELicence file added by AutoGineer1.0 KiB
- README.md3.9 KiB
- SKILL.md32.0 KiB
- references/canvas.md9.2 KiB
- references/connection.md2.9 KiB
- references/document-quality.md12.3 KiB
- references/exemplar.md3.9 KiB
- references/local-files.md6.4 KiB
- references/wireframe.md19.0 KiB
references/document-quality.md
Plan document quality — single source of truth
This file is the canonical quality bar for the plan document below the canvas: how it reads, which blocks to use, how open questions are surfaced, and the pre-handoff check. Read it in full before authoring the plan document; it is the quality bar. Do not write the document from memory or paraphrase these rules per mode.
<!-- SHARED-CORE:document-quality START -->
The document is a serious technical plan, not marketing. Write it the way a strong Claude or Codex implementation plan reads: outcome-first, prose-first, self-contained, and specific. State the objective and what "done" means, the scope and non-goals, the proposed approach with the key decisions and their rationale, ordered steps that name real files, symbols, actions, and data shapes, the risks, and a closing verification step (tests, build, or a checkable behavior). Replace vague prose with specifics; never ship a step like "make it work." No hero art, gradients, logos, nav bars, slogans, value props, giant landing-page headings, or marketing cards unless the user explicitly asks.
Every published plan must stand alone. Even when the agent is revising an existing plan, the output is a plan to do the work, not a changelog of the conversation. Do not write phrases like "preserve the previous plan", "do not drop the old idea", "as discussed above", "this revision", "unlike the prior version", or "correction from the earlier plan". Fold the right decisions into the plan as normal objective, architecture, scope, and roadmap prose. A reviewer who opens the plan from a link with no chat history should understand it. Avoid negative framing that only makes sense against absent context ("not the old mode", "not just X") unless the contrast is defined in the plan and genuinely helps; state the positive model directly.
Make abstract plans instantly legible. If the idea is broad, strategic, or intended for a third-party reviewer, put one concrete product snapshot near the top before dense architecture, mode tables, manifests, or roadmaps. For UI-capable concepts, that snapshot is usually a top-canvas app state plus a short paragraph that says what the user sees and what changes under the hood. Then put mechanics, data flow, sync boundaries, and implementation detail in separate diagrams or document sections.
Preserve the user's level of abstraction. A motivating use case is not automatically the architecture. When the prompt describes a broader framework, product mode, or reusable primitive, separate the reusable core from specific apps, providers, customers, scripts, or launch examples. Use the concrete example to make the plan understandable, then make clear which parts are core, which are app-specific adapters, and which are future examples.
When top visuals exist, they and the document never duplicate each other.
For UI work, the UI story lives in the top visual surface: canvas artboards for
static inspection, plus prototype tabs when the flow should be functional. The
document carries the technical depth the visuals cannot show — concrete
file/symbol maps, API and data contracts, code snippets, migration or
implementation phases, risks, and validation. For architecture/code reviews,
invert that: the document is the visual surface, and each recommendation
carries its own nearby inline diagram / data-model block plus file
evidence (the diagram bullet below owns how to author those diagrams).
Repeat a wireframe in the document only for a genuinely new detail view or
comparison. Skip the visual surface entirely for non-visual work and write a
clean rich document. For a simple binary UI visual choice, show the two
directions in the canvas only; do not repeat the same options as body
wireframes or prose. Put the actual choice in the bottom "Open Questions" form.
Use the right block, and make it carry substance. For the authoritative,
machine-checked list of block types and their data schemas, call get-plan-blocks
— it returns the live registry vocabulary (type, MDX tag, placement, key fields)
so you never emit a block the editor cannot render or round-trip:
rich-textfor plan prose with real bold/italic/code/links and nested lists.annotated-codefor the file map: when a load-bearing file is worth highlighting, prefer the annotated walkthrough over a barecodeblock — carry the real, syntax-highlighted code AND anchor short margin notes to the lines that actually change (the new action, the changed schema, the wiring point), so the reader sees what matters and why instead of code for code's sake. Each annotation is{ lines: "12" | "12-18"; label?; note }; keep a few high-signal notes per file, not one per line. Highlight only the files worth reading; never an exhaustive list of every touched file, and never a prose-only description of a file. Drop to a plaincodeblock only for a throwaway snippet with nothing to call out. When more than one file matters, group the blocks in a verticaltabsblock (the standard tab primitive) rather than a bespoke container. If the exact code is unknown, show the smallest plausible planned shape or a commented stub naming what to fill in. (code-tabsandimplementation-mapare legacy: their renderers stay for old plans, but do not author new ones.)For a decision: if the reviewer must still pick between a genuinely-open either/or, put it in the bottom Open Questions
question-formas asinglequestion — one option per real alternative, each with a short detail andrecommended: trueon the one you would choose; do not also restate the same choice elsewhere. If you have already committed to an approach, state it as settled prose or acalloutwithtone="decision", optionally with acolumnsblock for a side-by-side comparison of the options you weighed — not as a confusing mid-document form for a question you have already answered.columnsfor side-by-side before/after or current/target comparisons where each side needs real nested blocks; label the columns clearly and avoid stacking comparison blocks vertically when parallel reading is the point.diagramfor two-dimensional architecture, dependency, data-flow, or state relationships, only when it clarifies something real. Prefer standard two-dimensional layouts — paired before/after panels, layered diagrams, swimlanes, dependency maps, matrices, or grouped regions; do not default to left-to-right chains, and use a line only when the relationship is truly a sequence. Do not use a bodydiagramas the primary artifact for a requested product canvas, light storyboard, UI flow, screen flow, or wireframe; those belong in the top canvas as artboards withScreenwireframes first. Use diagrams below that canvas only for architecture, data flow, or implementation mechanics. For architecture/code diagrams, preferdata.html/data.csswith semantic HTML and inline SVG so the diagram can use panels, layers, matrices, arrows, annotations, and responsive layout directly. Author diagram HTML with renderer-owned primitives like.diagram-panel,.diagram-card,.diagram-node,.diagram-box,.diagram-pill,.diagram-muted, and[data-rough]; they map to the plan's Tailwind theme variables through--wf-ink,--wf-muted,--wf-line,--wf-paper,--wf-card,--wf-accent,--wf-accent-soft,--wf-warn, and--wf-ok, and switch to Excalifont plus rough.js outlines in sketchy mode. Do not setfont-familyand do not hard-code hex, rgb, or hsl colors in diagram HTML or CSS. Choose the outerframeintentionally: useshowwhen the diagram stands alone in a recap, comparison, or prose section; usehidewhen the diagram sits inside docs chrome, columns, tabs, cards, a canvas surface, or already has visible.diagram-panel/.diagram-boxstructure. Leave room for the sketch font: keep labels short, give nodes generous width, and place boundary/annotation labels in unused space instead of over nodes; labels must not overlap nodes, connectors, or each other. For small text/SVG changes to an existing HTML diagram, usepatch-diagram-htmlwith a uniquefind/replacesnippet instead of resending the wholedata.htmlstring. Use legacynodes/edgesonly for small previews or truly sequential flows. In architecture/code plans, prefer a repeated section rhythm: recommendation title, confidence and category badges, code-path evidence, a local before/after or current/target spatial diagram, then concise Problem/Solution/Why text.tabsfor multiple states, directions, or comparisons. A tab that reveals only prose usually means the plan is under-specified — include a relevant visual unless the tab is intentionally document-only.table,checklist,calloutfor scannable structure.
Open questions live at the bottom as a form when answers would change the
plan. Surface answerable unresolved decisions in a final question-form
block titled "Open Questions" so the renderer presents it as a distinct section.
That bottom form is the ONLY place that enumerates the open questions: never add
a second "Open Questions" heading, list, or recap of the same questions earlier
in the document. A one-line pointer in the overview prose ("a few decisions are
still open — see Open Questions below") is fine, but do not reproduce the
question list or a parallel questions/decisions section above it.
Use single or multi for clear choices, freeform for constraints,
recommended: true for the default you would pick, and option wireframe /
diagram previews only when the options are not already visible in the top
canvas. single and multi questions always render a write-in field so a
reviewer can answer with a custom option — never add an explicit "Other" option
yourself; set allowOther: false only when a free-text answer makes no sense.
Keep non-answerable assumptions or risks as concise callout blocks in
the relevant section. Never bury a questions/decisions wall inside the plan
narrative, and never ask the same question twice.
For complex plans, do not end without an open-question audit. If architecture, scope, UX, data shape, rollout, provider mapping, or ownership still depends on a choice, either commit to a recommendation with rationale or add it to the bottom form with a recommended default. A complex plan with no open questions is fine only when every meaningful decision has been explicitly made.
Verification must exercise the real workflow. The final verification section should go beyond typecheck/unit tests when the plan changes UI, local files, sync, providers, browser behavior, or multi-app flows. Include at least one end-to-end smoke that matches the user journey, such as a fresh repo/folder, real manifest or data fixture, browser interaction, save/sync action, and an on-disk or database assertion. Name the command or manual browser path when it is known.
custom-html is a bounded escape hatch only — a single complete fragment
inside a block, never html/head/body/script tags, never a generic
placeholder, density demo, or proof that custom HTML works. Prefer the native
blocks for normal plans. For architecture/code reviews, use diagram
data.html / data.css for rich local HTML/SVG diagrams instead of
custom-html. For UI/product work, custom-html is never the primary home for a
requested mockup, UI state, or visual comparison. If UI fidelity requires
HTML/CSS, image capture, or real React/CSS, the product fix is canvas support
for that artifact type, not moving the mockup into the document.
When custom-html is genuinely needed, author it against the sandbox-provided
theme tokens (--wf-paper, --wf-card, --wf-ink, --wf-muted,
--wf-line, --wf-radius, and the matching --plan-* aliases). Do not hardcode
hex/rgb/hsl light palettes such as white cards with dark ink; the same fragment
must read in dark mode without a plan-specific patch.
Before handoff, open the plan and check it. Fix overlap, excessive
whitespace, clipped fragments, misleading inactive controls, poor contrast, and
unreadable diagrams before asking for approval. Check the top canvas in the
current Plan theme, especially dark mode: white mockup panels, low-contrast
muted text, or invisible controls are defects. If a frame only works in one
theme, rewrite the HTML with --wf-* tokens and semantic helper classes before
surfacing the plan.
<!-- SHARED-CORE:document-quality END -->
Requirements and compatibility
Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta
“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.
Needs: Needs Node.js
Security
What our scanner noticed· Low risk
- Instructions that use the network
A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.
Attribution and licence
- Published by
- Builder.io
- Publisher
- Builder.io (Official)
- Source
- BuilderIO/skills · skills/visual-plan · commit f4f10b8
- Licence
- MIT License (redistribution allowed)
- LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
- ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
- Synced
AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by Builder.io.
Download ZIP
The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download visual-plan.zip