Plan Ui Change

作者 dotnet0608d8924cd3MIT5.5K 個星標收錄於 2026年10月8日更新於 2026年10月8日儲存庫今天更新

Plan complex Blazor UI features by decomposing them into focused components. USE FOR: building a complex Blazor page with multiple sections, planning component decomposition, designing a multi-section dashboard or layout, breaking down a large UI feature into composable components, pages with sidebars and content panels, any page with 3+ distinct visual sections or multiple interacting sub-features, identifying parent-child relationships and data flow. DO NOT USE FOR: creating new Blazor projects or apps from scratch (use create-blazor-project), implementing a single individual component (use author-component), writing component code with parameters and EventCallback (use author-component), or simple single-component pages.

AI 產生的概覽

將複雜的 Blazor UI 功能拆解為專注且可組合的元件,先規劃再實作。

功能
引導代理依五步規劃流程處理複雜的 Blazor UI 功能:把視覺區域對應成元件樹,依動作、轉譯模式、所擁有的狀態與預估規模為每個元件分類,設計資料流(參數向下、EventCallback 向上),找出可重用的機會,並以由下而上的順序安排實作。它會產出一份簡短的元件計畫(元件樹、表格、資料流、實作順序),接著立即撰寫 .razor 元件。它也列出應避免的反模式,例如單體頁面元件與參數逐層傳遞。
適用情境
適用於建置包含三個以上明顯視覺區域的複雜 Blazor 頁面、多區塊儀表板或版面,或任何需要拆分成可組合元件的大型 UI 功能。不適用於從零建立新的 Blazor 專案、實作單一元件,或簡單的單元件頁面。
執行需求
僅為指示說明,未附帶指令碼。它假定處於 Blazor 專案環境,且代理能建立 .razor 檔案,但未指明特定工具、套件、執行環境、認證或網路存取需求。

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:

ComponentActionRender ModeState OwnedLines (est.)
InventoryDashboardCreateInteractiveServerproduct list, filter state~80
StockSummaryBarCreate(inherits)none — receives data~30
InventoryFiltersCreate(inherits)search text, selected category~60
InventoryTableCreate(inherits)sort column, sort direction~50
InventoryRowCreate(inherits)inline-edit mode flag~60
AddProductFormCreate(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 ←── AddProductForm

Rules:

  • 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:

  1. Models/DTOs — define the data shapes
  2. Services — data access, business logic (interface + implementation)
  3. Leaf components — components with no children (InventoryRow, StockSummaryBar)
  4. Container components — components that compose leaves (InventoryTable, InventoryFilters)
  5. Page component — wires everything together, registers routes
  6. 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.

markdown
## 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 Order1. [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-PatternWhy It's WrongCorrect Approach
One page component with 500+ linesImpossible to test, reuse, or maintainDecompose into focused components
Passing 10+ parameters through intermediate componentsParameter drilling obscures intentUse cascading values or a scoped state service
Child component fetching its own data from an APIMultiple components making redundant callsParent owns data, passes via parameters
Inline rendering of list items with complex markupDuplicated logic, no reuse, hard to testExtract item template into its own component
Building everything in one file then "refactoring later"Refactoring rarely happens; the monolith shipsPlan the decomposition upfront
Generic components for one-off usageOver-engineering adds complexityOnly extract generics when reuse is proven

Guidelines

  • Plan briefly, then implement. Write a concise component table and data flow map, then immediately create the .razor files — 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: ProductCard not ProductRenderer, OrderFilters not FilterHandler.

來源與署名

來源:dotnet/skills位於plugins/dotnet-blazor/skills/plan-ui-change提交0608d89

授權條款: MIT

內容歸原作者所有。SourceWeft 從公開儲存庫中收錄這些內容。

檢舉或申請下架