Loading...
Loading...
Found 28 Skills
Use when the user says "/plan-review", "plan review", or "PRD review" and provides a plan file path that needs critical review and iterative refinement with Codex.
Auto-assembles review panel using deterministic rules, dispatches agents against plan file, collects verdicts.
Inline adversarial plan review — 3 sequential checks (Feasibility, Completeness, Scope & Alignment) performed by the calling LLM in its own context. No subagents spawned. Call after saving a plan. Returns GATE_PASS or GATE_FAIL with blocking issues.
[Planning] Self-review plan for validity, correctness, and best practices
Carmack-level plan review via RepoPrompt or Codex. Use when reviewing Flow epic specs or design docs. Triggers on /flow-next:plan-review.
CEO/Founder-mode plan review. Rethink the problem, find the 10-star product, challenge premises, expand scope when it creates a better product. Four modes: SCOPE EXPANSION (dream big), SELECTIVE EXPANSION (hold scope + cherry-pick), HOLD SCOPE (maximum rigor), SCOPE REDUCTION (strip to essentials). Adapted from gstack/plan-ceo-review (Garry Tan, MIT license).
Debate implementation plans between Claude Code and Codex CLI. After Claude Code creates a plan, invoke this skill to have Codex review it. Both AIs debate through multiple rounds until reaching full consensus before implementation begins.
Use when reviewing a plan before implementation begins. Not for autonomous plan analysis — use plan-review agent instead. Challenges scope, walks through architecture/quality/tests/performance interactively with mandatory user checkpoints and opinionated recommendations.
Use when another skill or agent needs a review panel assembled, retained, or converged — invoked by /review-loop, /plan-review, and code-reviewer, not directly by users.
End-to-end orchestration for non-trivial software feature development. Use this skill whenever the user asks to implement a PR-sized feature, break down a plan, have subagents review a plan, run a plan-review-development-acceptance loop, coordinate multiple review perspectives, produce an acceptance report, or generate an HTML PR summary. Prefer this skill for multi-step code changes even if the user only says "build this feature" and the task is not a tiny one-file edit.
Single adversarial review pass over the integrated branch diff — spec-compliance, code quality, and test adequacy judged together by one fresh-context reviewer. Triggers: /review, 'review the changes', or after delegation completes. Emits one verdict (reviews.review.status). Do NOT use for plan-review (that is its own dispatched gate) or for debugging.
Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates documentation (CONTEXT.md, ADRs) inline as decisions crystallise. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's language and documented decisions.