review

To perform a rigorous code review on a PR diff, the Skill inspects actual diffs and produces concrete, severity-ordered recommendations covering correctness, security, performance, and tests before merging. It catches failure modes and accidental complexity in code changes.

Stress-testing an architecture plan for execution readiness involves validating scope, strategy, and execution risks for roadmap approaches. The Skill pressure-tests proposed designs to produce actionable findings before any implementation starts, ensuring weak scope and brittle designs are caught early.

Yes, you can use this to clarify scope changes and analyze risks in common development workflows. It requires explicit scope-change handling and provides risk analysis across both plan validation and code scrutiny to improve the safety of engineering work.

Yes, the review process requires mode routing for plan review versus code review. It supports structured workflows and checklists tailored to each mode, emphasizing correctness, observability, security, and test rigor depending on the input type.

To get actionable findings for a brittle software design, the Skill performs rigorous plan and design review to identify accidental complexity and ambiguity. It outputs ordered, actionable findings that highlight failure modes and verification guidance across common workflows.

You need a structured plan review for your roadmap implementation when you want to pressure-test scope and execution risks before coding begins. This prevents unclear strategy and risky architectural approaches from progressing into the actual development phase.