sp-review-against-plan

Classify PR review findings against an execution plan and send NEED_WORK blockers.

23|2|Updated Mar 1, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/tta-lab/ttal-cli --skill sp-review-against-plan
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: sp-review-against-plan
Source: https://github.com/tta-lab/ttal-cli/tree/main/skills/sp-review-against-plan
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/tta-lab/ttal-cli --skill sp-review-against-plan

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill prevents reviewers from accepting incomplete or watered-down pull requests by requiring the PR to match the plan exactly and treating any in-scope undone work as a hard blocker.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Plan-to-PR execution grading: Buckets findings into in-scope/done, in-scope/undone (blocking), and cosmetic/no-value (silently ignored).
  • Strict blocker discipline: Marks every in-scope + undone item as ALWAYS BLOCKING with a concrete “what to fix” payload sent back to the worker.
  • Evidence-anchored review: Requires quoting or referencing the subtask/annotation and checking PR diffs or PR URL evidence rather than judging code quality or intent.

Use case: After a worker generates a PR from a detailed multi-repo task plan, use this Skill to verify that every explicit ask in the plan was actually delivered, and to immediately send any gaps back to the worker as blockers so pipeline iterations don’t leak scope.

Quick Start

Run the review against the task’s plan by calling ttal go for the planning hex and then sending NEED_WORK blockers back to the worker with ttal send based on the Category 2 items.

Frequently Asked Questions about sp-review-against-plan

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I enforce a pull request review against an original execution plan?

To enforce a pull request review against an execution plan, load subtasks from the task tree and verify PR diffs to classify whether explicit asks are delivered, marking any in-scope undone work as a hard blocker.

What is scope control in multi-repo workflow pipeline reviews?

Scope control in multi-repo workflow reviews prevents scope leaks by bucketing PR findings into in-scope or undone categories, treating every incomplete planned subtask as a strict blocking item with concrete fix instructions.

How do I send blocking feedback to workers for incomplete PR tasks?

You send blocking feedback by classifying in-scope and undone plan items as Category 2 blockers, then using ttal send to report structured NEED_WORK payloads with concrete fix instructions back to the worker.

When do I need evidence-anchored execution validation for pull requests?

You need evidence-anchored execution validation when reviewers must verify delivery by quoting subtask annotations and checking PR diff evidence, ensuring iterations don't leak scope instead of judging code quality or intent.

Does PR review against plan ignore cosmetic code changes?

Yes, PR review against plan silently ignores cosmetic and no-value changes, focusing strictly on evidence-anchored grading of in-scope delivery and blocking any incomplete explicit execution plan asks.

What's the best way to verify multi-repo task plan delivery in a PR?

The best way to verify multi-repo task plan delivery is to run a systematic plan-to-PR execution grading that checks explicit subtask asks against actual PR diffs, immediately sending gaps back as blockers.