Plan UI Change
.NET (Microsoft)OfficialPublished by .NET (Microsoft)
- Skill
- Workflow
- Software development
- MIT
- No issues found
AutoGineer summary
Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author
The plan-ui-change skill provides a systematic approach to building complex Blazor interfaces. It mandates a planning phase where developers map out visual regions, define component hierarchies, establish data ownership, and determine communication patterns via parameters and EventCallbacks. By enforcing a bottom-up implementation strategy, it helps prevent the creation of monolithic, unmaintainable components and ensures that state management is handled predictably across the application.
What it does
- Maps complex UI designs into a hierarchical component tree.
- Defines clear state ownership and data flow between parent and child components.
- Provides a standardized table for tracking component actions, render modes, and estimated size.
- Establishes a bottom-up implementation order to ensure code dependencies are met.
- Identifies opportunities for component reuse and generic template extraction.
- Enforces a workflow that moves immediately from planning to implementation.
When to use it
- When building a complex Blazor page with multiple distinct sections.
- When designing dashboards or layouts that require nested sub-features.
- When a UI feature is expected to exceed 200 lines of code.
- When you need to clarify parent-child relationships and data flow for a new feature.
Advantages
- Reduces technical debt by preventing monolithic component growth.
- Improves code maintainability through focused, single-responsibility components.
- Ensures predictable data flow using standard Blazor patterns.
- Facilitates easier testing by breaking down UI into smaller, isolated units.
Usage examples
- “Plan the UI for a new customer management dashboard with a sidebar, search filters, and a data grid.”
- The agent will generate a component tree, a classification table, a data flow map, and an implementation order, then immediately begin creating the necessary .razor files.
- “I need to build a complex order processing page. How should I structure it?”
- The agent will outline the decomposition of the page into smaller components like OrderSummary, OrderFilters, and OrderTable, followed by the implementation of these components.
Install
Download the skill as a ZIP:
https://mp-staging.autogineer.com/agent-skills/dotnet/plan-ui-change/downloadUnzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:
mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip plan-ui-change.zip -d .agents/skills
Documentation by .NET (Microsoft)
Plan a Blazor UI Change
When asked to build a complex UI feature, plan the component decomposition first, then immediately implement it. A single monolithic page component is almost never the right answer — break the UI into focused, composable components.
Planning Workflow
Step 1 — Map the Visual Regions
Read the request and identify every distinct visual region. Each region that has its own data, behavior, or layout responsibility is a candidate component.
Draw the component tree:
InventoryDashboard (page — owns data, orchestrates layout)
├── StockSummaryBar (read-only stats: total items, low-stock count, value)
├── InventoryFilters (search box, category dropdown, stock-level toggle)
├── InventoryTable (sortable table of products)
│ └── InventoryRow (single product row with inline edit/delete)
└── AddProductForm (slide-out form for new products)Rules for identifying components:
Distinct responsibility — a region owns its own state or behavior → separate component
Repeated structure — items in a list, cards in a grid → extract the item template
Independent interactivity — a section that handles user input separately from its siblings → separate component
Size — any section that would exceed ~150 lines of markup on its own → split it
Step 2 — Classify Each Component
For every component in the tree, determine:
| Component | Action | Render Mode | State Owned | Lines (est.) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| InventoryDashboard | Create | InteractiveServer | product list, filter state | ~80 |
| StockSummaryBar | Create | (inherits) | none — receives data | ~30 |
| InventoryFilters | Create | (inherits) | search text, selected category | ~60 |
| InventoryTable | Create | (inherits) | sort column, sort direction | ~50 |
| InventoryRow | Create | (inherits) | inline-edit mode flag | ~60 |
| AddProductForm | Create | (inherits) | form model | ~80 |
A page component that exceeds ~200 lines of combined markup + code is too large. If your estimate puts a single component above that, split further.
Step 3 — Design Data Flow
Identify the state owner for each piece of data, then map how it flows:
InventoryDashboard (owns: products[], filters)
│
├─ [Parameter] products ──→ StockSummaryBar (reads aggregate stats)
│
├─ [Parameter] filters ──→ InventoryFilters
│ └─ EventCallback<Filters> OnFiltersChanged ──→ InventoryDashboard
│
├─ [Parameter] filteredProducts ──→ InventoryTable
│ └─ [Parameter] product ──→ InventoryRow
│ ├─ EventCallback<Product> OnSave ──→ InventoryTable ──→ InventoryDashboard
│ └─ EventCallback<Product> OnDelete ──→ InventoryTable ──→ InventoryDashboard
│
└─ EventCallback<Product> OnProductAdded ←── AddProductFormRules:
Data always flows down through
[Parameter]Events always flow up through
EventCallback<T>The page/parent owns the data and passes filtered/transformed views to children
Children never mutate parameters — they notify the parent via callbacks
If data must cross more than 2 levels without intermediate components needing it, use a cascading value or a scoped service
Step 4 — Identify Reuse Opportunities
Before creating a new component, check if an existing component in the project can serve the purpose. Look for:
Existing list-item components that match the structure
Shared filter/search components already in the project
Generic components (e.g.,
DataTable<T>,Pagination) that accept templates
If a component will be used in more than one page, place it in a Shared/ or Components/ folder.
Step 5 — Order the Implementation
Build bottom-up — leaf components first, then parents that compose them:
Models/DTOs — define the data shapes
Services — data access, business logic (interface + implementation)
Leaf components — components with no children (InventoryRow, StockSummaryBar)
Container components — components that compose leaves (InventoryTable, InventoryFilters)
Page component — wires everything together, registers routes
Configuration — DI registration, render mode setup
Each component should be independently compilable. Never reference a component that doesn't exist yet.
Output Format
Present the plan briefly, then immediately proceed to implement — never stop at just the plan or ask for confirmation before writing code. The plan is a thinking tool, not a deliverable.
## Component Plan: [Feature Name]
### Component Tree
[ASCII tree showing parent-child relationships]
### Component Table
| Component | Action | Render Mode | Purpose | Est. Lines |
|-----------|--------|-------------|---------|------------|
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
### Data Flow
[State owner] → [Parameters down] → [EventCallbacks up]
### Implementation Order
1. [First file to create — why]
2. [Second file — why]
...After outputting the plan, immediately begin implementing the components in the order listed. Do not wait for approval or ask "shall I proceed?" — the plan is a guide for you to follow, not a proposal for the user to approve.
Anti-Patterns to Avoid
| Anti-Pattern | Why It's Wrong | Correct Approach |
|---|---|---|
| One page component with 500+ lines | Impossible to test, reuse, or maintain | Decompose into focused components |
| Passing 10+ parameters through intermediate components | Parameter drilling obscures intent | Use cascading values or a scoped state service |
| Child component fetching its own data from an API | Multiple components making redundant calls | Parent owns data, passes via parameters |
| Inline rendering of list items with complex markup | Duplicated logic, no reuse, hard to test | Extract item template into its own component |
| Building everything in one file then "refactoring later" | Refactoring rarely happens; the monolith ships | Plan the decomposition upfront |
| Generic components for one-off usage | Over-engineering adds complexity | Only extract generics when reuse is proven |
Guidelines
Plan briefly, then implement. Write a concise component table and data flow map, then immediately create the
.razorfiles — never stop at just the plan.Prefer many small components over one large one. A component with a single clear purpose is easier to understand, test, and reuse.
State ownership is the first decision. Before writing fetch logic, decide which component owns the data.
Build bottom-up. Create leaf components first so parent components can reference them immediately.
Name components after what they render, not what they do internally:
ProductCardnotProductRenderer,OrderFiltersnotFilterHandler.
Files
- ATTRIBUTION.mdAdded by AutoGineer841 B
- LICENSELicence file added by AutoGineer1.1 KiB
- SKILL.md7.7 KiB
LICENSE
The MIT License (MIT) Copyright (c) .NET Foundation and Contributors All rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions: The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
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.
Security
No issues found by our static scan· No issues found
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
- .NET (Microsoft)
- Publisher
- .NET (Microsoft) (Official)
- Source
- dotnet/skills · plugins/dotnet-blazor/skills/plan-ui-change · commit 96c3d68
- 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 .NET (Microsoft).
Download ZIP
The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download plan-ui-change.zip