plan-review

To review a project plan, provide the draft to the workflow to generate structured feedback covering architecture, cost estimates, and risk assessments before kickoff. It surfaces ADR gaps, missing dependencies, and scope creep using formal reporting formats.

A sprint planning review should include structured evaluation criteria for building block specifications, cost estimates, and implementation roadmaps. The review generates a formal report with Critical Issues, Major Recommendations, Minor Suggestions, and Questions sections.

Yes, you can use it for architecture reviews to surface ADR gaps, missing dependencies, and scope creep before project kickoff. It applies structured evaluation criteria and checklists to identify these specific risks in the plan.

The best way to structure risk assessment feedback is using a formal report with Critical Issues, Major Recommendations, Minor Suggestions, and Questions sections. This ensures actionable feedback is categorized by severity for the implementation roadmap.

Yes, the project plan review supports cost analysis and building block specifications through structured evaluation checklists. It evaluates these components alongside sprint planning and risk assessments to provide comprehensive pre-implementation feedback.

Automated checklists for implementation roadmap reviews rely on the provided draft's completeness and cannot infer unstated business context. They systematically evaluate architecture and cost estimates but require human judgment to validate surfaced acceptance criteria gaps.