paw-impl-review

Analyze implementation changes and return a pass/fail verdict with issues.

39|6|Updated Oct 8, 2025
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/lossyrob/phased-agent-workflow --skill paw-impl-review
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: paw-impl-review
Source: https://github.com/lossyrob/phased-agent-workflow/tree/main/skills/paw-impl-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/lossyrob/phased-agent-workflow --skill paw-impl-review

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill analyzes implementation changes within PAW to provide a structured quality verdict, enabling reliable gating before PR creation.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Review for quality and maintainability
  • Generate documentation/docstrings and improve readability
  • Enforce project instructions and plan-completeness checks during reviews
  • Return a structured verdict (pass/fail + issues) to the orchestrator

Quick Start

Use this skill during a PAW implementation review by providing the latest git diff and ImplementationPlan.md; the skill will return a verdict and prioritized issues for the PR.

Frequently Asked Questions about paw-impl-review

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I automate code quality checks before creating a pull request?

Automated code quality checks before a PR use a structured review to analyze the git diff and return a pass/fail verdict with prioritized issues. This enforces plan-completeness and project instructions without directly editing files.

What is a structured PR review verdict and how does it gate implementation?

A structured PR review verdict is a pass/fail decision with attached issues, generated by assessing code maintainability and documentation against an implementation plan. It gates implementation by signaling readiness before PR creation.

How do I review a git diff for maintainability and documentation completeness?

Reviewing a git diff for maintainability and documentation requires analyzing implementation changes against project instructions and an implementation plan. The process enforces completeness checks and returns prioritized issues for readability and docstring improvements.

Can I enforce implementation plan completeness checks using only repository context?

Yes, enforcing implementation plan completeness checks operates using only repository context such as git diffs and tests. It assesses code quality and adherence to instructions without performing edits or taking PR actions.

Does the review process generate documentation and docstrings automatically?

The review process generates documentation and docstrings to improve readability as part of its structured assessment. It analyzes implementation changes and returns issues prioritized for enhancement before returning the final verdict.

When should I use an orchestrator-based quality gate instead of standard code review?

Use an orchestrator-based quality gate during the implementation phase when you need automated, structured pass/fail verdicts based on plan-completeness. It differs from standard review by returning prioritized issues without performing edits or PR actions.