review-plan

Solid

Review implementation plans for parallelization, TDD, types, libraries, and security before execution

AI & Automation 61 stars 8 forks Updated today Apache-2.0

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 87/100

Stars 20%
60
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
50
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# Review Plan Review implementation plans created by `superpowers:writing-plans` before execution. ## Arguments - Path: Plan file to review (e.g., `docs/plans/2025-01-15-auth-feature.md`) ## Hard gates (sequence) Do not skip ahead; each step **passes** only when the condition is objectively satisfied (artifact path, tool success, or labeled capture—not “I read it mentally”). 1. **Plan file reachable** — **Pass:** `Read` (or equivalent) succeeds on `Path`; if not, stop and report the missing path. **Pass:** You can quote or point to where `**Goal:**`, `**Architecture:**`, and `**Tech Stack:**` appear, *or* you record “header field X absent” as a finding before Step 2. 2. **Skills loaded before agents** — **Pass:** For each row you will rely on in Step 2’s table, the corresponding skill is loaded via the `Skill` tool (or you record explicit `N/A` with reason, e.g. stack not present). Do **not** spawn Step 3 `Task` runs until this gate passes. 3. **Five reviews captured** — **Pass:** You have five labeled artifacts (one per agent): pasted outputs, task transcripts, or saved snippet files. **Pass:** Each of the five INVESTIGATE/CHECK/VERIFY prompts has a corresponding response block before Step 4. 4. **Review file on disk before user prompt** — **Pass:** The file at `[plan-dir]/[plan-basename]-review.md` exists; **Pass:** `Read` succeeds on that path. Only then run the “Next Steps” / options prompt in Step 5. ## Step 1: Read and Parse Plan Read the plan file and extract: ...

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

Code & Development Solid

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.

314 Updated today
tobihagemann
Code & Development Listed

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.

19 Updated today
atomicinnovation
Code & Development Solid

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

69 Updated 2 days ago
testdouble
Code & Development Listed

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.

1 Updated 5 days ago
gitgitWi
AI & Automation Listed

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.

7 Updated today
Ramsbaby