review-plan
SolidReview implementation plans for parallelization, TDD, types, libraries, and security before execution
Install
Quality Score: 87/100
Skill Content
Details
- Author
- existential-birds
- Repository
- existential-birds/beagle
- Created
- 5 months ago
- Last Updated
- today
- Language
- Shell
- License
- Apache-2.0
Integrates with
Similar Skills
Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category
review-plan
Review an implementation plan: launches an internal plan review and `/peer-review` in parallel and returns combined findings. Use when the user asks to "review my plan", "review this plan", "check my plan", "critique my plan", or wants plan feedback before implementation.
review-plan
Review an implementation plan through multiple quality lenses and collaboratively iterate based on findings. Use when the user wants to evaluate a plan before implementation.
iterative-plan-review
Sharpens and stress-tests an existing plan file through multiple codebase-grounded review passes, editing it in place and recording every finding and iteration in cross-referenced companion files. Use this skill whenever the user wants to iterate on, refine, tighten, or improve a plan — including terse commands like "iterate", "refine it", or "iterate for correctness" where a plan is present in context. Also use it when the user asks to verify, validate, or confirm feasibility of an approach (e.g., "can you verify this will work", "check this for correctness", "is this sound") — the defining signal is that the user wants critical evaluation of a proposed approach, not execution of it. Produces two companion files in an artifacts/ subfolder next to the plan: review-findings.md (every finding raised and how it was resolved) and review-iteration-history.md (round-by-round record of specialists engaged and plan changes applied). Do NOT use for implementing plan steps, generating new plans from scratch, writing te
plan-review
Run a multi-LLM review on `plan.md` and `tasks.md` before implementation starts, capturing each reviewer's output as a file and synthesizing a Korean summary the user reads. Use this whenever a plan is non-trivial (size M with external dependencies, or any size L). Different models catch different gaps; the cost of an extra reviewer pass is tiny compared to discovering a missing requirement halfway through develop. Also use whenever the user asks for a "second opinion" on a plan or wants to validate an approach before committing to it.
jarvis-plan-review
11-section rigorous design plan review covering problem framing, scope, architecture, security, observability, deployment, performance, reliability, testing, maintainability, and migration. Korean adaptation of gstack /plan-ceo-review, tuned for sole-developer + AI-pair-programming workflows. Not a rubber stamp — pushes plans toward best-in-class.