Abstract: Debates regarding mandatory content, guided content, and the distinction between rigid and flexible control have persisted in planning for decades. To improve the territorial spatial planning system, it is crucial to explore a management approach that integrates both rigidity and flexibility through mandatory and guided measures. Using logical analysis from the perspective of administrative action, this study examines the background, administrative logic, and institutional design of mandatory content. The study concludes that mandatory content and rigid control requirements reflect the logic of spatial baseline constraints and the protection of public interest, while inducement and flexible guidance reflect the logic of strategic orientation and structural guidance. Under high-level governance, planning as an administrative action should emphasize rigidity in its external dimensions, elasticity in its internal dimension, and systemic integration across dimensions. Within a "system-technology" theoretical framework, a tiered institutional design of "high structural flexibility—low planning flexibility—high content flexibility" can be adopted. Mandatory content and rigid controls can be distinguished from planning elements through binding indicators, mandatory boundaries, and rigid control requirements, while inducement content and flexible guidance can be distinguished from planning elements by anticipatory indicators, structural relationships, and adaptable guidance requirements.