plan-review

Validate implementation plans via multi-persona review with P0–P3 severity gating.

1|Updated Oct 17, 2025
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/softwaresalt/csv-managed --skill plan-review-softwaresalt
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: plan-review
Source: https://github.com/softwaresalt/csv-managed/tree/main/.github/skills/plan-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/softwaresalt/csv-managed --skill plan-review-softwaresalt

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill prevents inefficient or unsafe execution by reviewing implementation plans for architectural soundness, scope correctness, and compliance with coding standards before the plan is decomposed into work items.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Multi-persona gatekeeping: Runs a coordinated set of reviewer personas to catch gaps, contract violations, and missing verification steps, with consolidated severity outcomes.
  • Severity-driven decisions: Classifies findings into P0–P3 and converts them into clear gate outcomes (FAIL, PASS, or ADVISORY) to control whether harvest proceeds.
  • Plan hardening compliance checks: Enforces that plans with hardening signals include sufficient ## Plan Hardening / ProposedAction and ActionRisk classification when strict-safety is enabled.
  • Scope and precedent validation: Audits scope boundaries to detect scope creep, and checks prior solutions in docs/compound/ to flag contradictions or ignored relevant history.
  • Append-only plan updates: Appends a ## Plan Review section to the same plan file so downstream steps can consolidate the decided plan later.

Quick Start

Run plan-review with the path to your plan file in docs/plans/ and let it append the Plan Review section with a gate decision.

Frequently Asked Questions about plan-review

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I validate an implementation plan for architecture and security before starting development?

You can validate an implementation plan using multi-persona plan review to check architectural soundness, scope boundaries, and security touchpoints before decomposing it into work items.

What is the best way to prevent scope creep and flawed work decomposition in software plans?

Scope auditing during plan review prevents scope creep by checking scope boundaries and validating prior solutions in docs/compound/ to flag contradictions before work begins.

How do I enforce strict-safety hardening requirements in a plan review process?

Plan hardening compliance checks enforce strict-safety requirements by verifying plans include sufficient ProposedAction and ActionRisk classifications when hardening signals are present.

Can I use automated gatekeeping to block unsafe implementation plans from proceeding?

Yes, severity-driven gatekeeping classifies findings into P0–P3 levels and converts them into clear FAIL, PASS, or ADVISORY gate outcomes to control whether harvest proceeds.

Does plan review work with Rust implementation expectations in docs/plans/?

Plan review validates Rust implementation expectations for plan artifacts stored in docs/plans/, applying depth constraints and strict-safety hardening requirements to the review process.

How does an append-only plan review output integrate with downstream development steps?

The review appends a structured Plan Review section with gate decisions to the same plan file, allowing downstream steps to consolidate the decided plan later without modifying existing content.