AI Skill Report Card

Planning Autonomous Goals

A-85·Sep 27, 2026·Source: Web

Autonomous Goal Planning

14 / 15

Given a goal (e.g., "Launch a beta version of the app in 4 weeks"), immediately produce:

  1. Goal Tree — the goal broken into sub-goals
  2. Task Tree — each sub-goal broken into concrete tasks
  3. Execution Order — sequence in which tasks should run
  4. Dependency Map — what blocks what
  5. Completion Strategy — how to verify the goal is done

No preamble, no clarifying questions unless the goal is truly unparseable — infer reasonable assumptions and state them briefly instead.

Recommendation▾
Add a second example with a different domain (e.g., non-software goal) to show generalizability beyond app launches
14 / 15

Progress:

  • Parse the goal statement; extract explicit constraints (deadline, resources, scope)
  • Decompose goal into 2-5 sub-goals (Goal Tree)
  • Decompose each sub-goal into concrete, atomic tasks (Task Tree)
  • Identify dependencies between tasks (Dependency Map)
  • Topologically sort tasks into an Execution Order, grouping parallelizable tasks
  • Define a Completion Strategy (success criteria + verification method)
  • Flag risks, ambiguities, or missing information as assumptions

Step details

1. Goal Tree Root = the stated goal. Children = sub-goals that are necessary and sufficient to achieve it. Keep depth shallow (2-3 levels max) — sub-goals, not tasks, live here.

2. Task Tree Each sub-goal expands into 3-8 atomic tasks. A task is atomic if it can be assigned to a single execution unit (person/agent/script) without further splitting for planning purposes.

3. Dependency Map Express as Task A → Task B (A must complete before B). Distinguish:

  • Hard dependency: B cannot start without A's output
  • Soft dependency: B is easier/better after A but not blocked

4. Execution Order Group into phases (parallel batches), not just a flat list. Phase N contains all tasks whose dependencies are satisfied by end of Phase N-1.

5. Completion Strategy For each sub-goal: a measurable success criterion + a verification action (test, review, metric check).

Recommendation▾
Include a brief example of handling a truly ambiguous/underspecified goal to demonstrate the assumption-labeling behavior in practice
16 / 20

Example 1: Input: "Launch a beta version of the app in 4 weeks"

Output:

GOAL TREE
Root: Launch beta in 4 weeks
├── 1. Core feature complete
├── 2. Quality assured
├── 3. Infrastructure ready
└── 4. Beta users onboarded

TASK TREE
1. Core feature complete
   1.1 Finalize feature scope
   1.2 Implement backend endpoints
   1.3 Implement frontend UI
   1.4 Integrate backend + frontend
2. Quality assured
   2.1 Write test cases
   2.2 Run QA pass
   2.3 Fix critical bugs
3. Infrastructure ready
   3.1 Set up staging environment
   3.2 Set up monitoring/logging
   3.3 Prepare deployment pipeline
4. Beta users onboarded
   4.1 Recruit beta testers
   4.2 Write onboarding docs
   4.3 Send invites

DEPENDENCY MAP
1.1 → 1.2, 1.3
1.2, 1.3 → 1.4
1.4 → 2.1
2.1 → 2.2 → 2.3
3.1, 3.2 → 3.3
2.3, 3.3 → 4.3
4.1, 4.2 → 4.3 (soft)

EXECUTION ORDER (phases)
Phase 1 (Week 1): 1.1, 3.1, 3.2, 4.1, 4.2
Phase 2 (Week 2): 1.2, 1.3
Phase 3 (Week 3): 1.4, 3.3
Phase 4 (Week 3-4): 2.1, 2.2, 2.3
Phase 5 (Week 4): 4.3 → Launch

COMPLETION STRATEGY
- Core feature: PR merged + demo passes acceptance checklist
- Quality: 0 critical/high bugs open, test suite passing
- Infra: staging deploy succeeds, monitoring dashboard live
- Onboarding: ≥80% of invited testers activate within 48h

ASSUMPTIONS
- "App" assumed to be web app with existing codebase
- Team size assumed sufficient for parallel phases
Recommendation▾
Show a small counter-example of a bad output (e.g., overly flat execution order or vague completion criteria) to reinforce the pitfalls section
  • Always state assumptions explicitly rather than asking follow-up questions when goal is under-specified.
  • Keep the Goal Tree strategic (sub-goals) and the Task Tree tactical (atomic actions) — don't mix levels.
  • Prefer phased/batched execution order over a single flat sequential list — surfaces parallelization opportunities.
  • Every sub-goal must have a measurable completion criterion, not a vague description.
  • Scale depth/detail to goal complexity: a simple goal gets a simple tree, not padding.
  • Don't create tasks with no owner-able unit of work (too abstract to execute).
  • Don't omit soft dependencies — they matter for realistic scheduling even if not blocking.
  • Don't produce a purely linear execution order when tasks are independent and parallelizable.
  • Don't skip the Completion Strategy — "done" must be verifiable, not assumed.
  • Don't ask the user clarifying questions before producing output; infer and label assumptions instead.
0
Grade A-AI Skill Framework
Scorecard
Criteria Breakdown
Quick Start
14/15
Workflow
14/15
Examples
16/20
Completeness
17/20
Format
14/15
Conciseness
13/15