Results for “plan-review”

Survey a codebase's animation and motion code as a senior motion advisor, then produce a prioritized audit and self-contained implementation plans for other agents (or cheaper models) to execute. Read-only on source code — it plans improvements, it does not apply them. Use when the user asks to "improve the animations", "audit the motion", "make this app feel better", or wants a roadmap of animation fixes rather than a review of a single diff. Source: github.com/emilkowalski/skills.

Use when asked to fix, build, refactor, review, verify, or release software and the work is non-trivial — including delivering a change request (issue, ticket, or request) from intake through planning, gates, implementation, review, verified PR, and authorized post-merge release. neckbeard routes the change through framing, discovery, design, implementation, review, verification, delivery, and learning — choosing the smallest *safe* intervention, proving it at the real delivery boundary, and leaving an inspectable evidence ledger. For change-request / issue-to-PR work, conditionally loads a 9-phase journey with gates, delivery packet, and lifecycle integration. Composes specialist catalog skills rather than replacing them. Not a persona, not a '10x developer' prompt, not a LOC-minimizer. The journey is not loaded for plain fixes, refactors, or reviews that lack an issue/ticket trajectory.

Designs the contract for an API change inside one codebase — a component's props, a function surface, URL or query parameters, an event payload, or a module boundary — through a discovery pass, an options document with one recommendation, a question round, and an adversarial validation round, with every element of the contract justified from one stated goal. Use when you want to design, shape, decide, or nail down an interface, contract, signature, or API change for a capability you can already describe, sized for roughly one pull request. Produces a design document and changes no code. Does not specify what a feature should do — use plan-a-feature. Does not plan delivery or sequencing — use plan-implementation. Does not assess the architecture of existing code — use architectural-analysis. Does not write the code — use tdd. Does not restructure existing code — use refactor. Runs its rounds without pausing for review; to review each round as it lands, use pairing.

Senior Project Manager for enterprise software, SaaS, and digital transformation projects. Specializes in portfolio management, quantitative risk analysis, resource optimization, stakeholder alignment, and executive reporting. Uses advanced methodologies including EMV analysis, Monte Carlo simulation, WSJF prioritization, and multi-dimensional health scoring. Use when a user needs help with project plans, project status reports, risk assessments, resource allocation, project roadmaps, milestone tracking, team capacity planning, portfolio health reviews, program management, or executive-level project reporting — especially for enterprise-scale initiatives with multiple workstreams, complex dependencies, or multi-million dollar budgets.

Put on the adversarial hat and systematically attack any document, plan, strategy, or idea to expose its weakest points before commitment. Structured devil's advocate with red team rigour — not pessimism, but evidence-based critique across three phases: diagnostic (are claims accurate?), creative (is the problem artificially constrained?), challenge (are solutions robust?). Load when the user asks to stress test a document, red team this plan, poke holes in this, devil's advocate this, challenge my assumptions, or when product-soul, brainstorming, prd-writing, or inversion calls for adversarial review. Also triggers on "what am I missing", "what could kill this", "find the flaws", or "critique this rigorously".

Creates decision-focused PRDs and product specs — the kind that make explicit decisions, not document hopes. Make sure to use this skill whenever someone asks to write, review, draft, or improve any product document, including PRDs, feature specs, requirements docs, or product specifications. Trigger even when the user doesn't say "PRD" explicitly — phrases like "write a spec for X", "define requirements for Y", "what should my PRD include", "help me document this feature", or "my spec feels too vague" all apply. Do not attempt to write the PRD directly without consulting this skill. Produces 5-stage PRDs with behavior contracts (15-25 labeled examples for AI features), measurable success metrics with specific thresholds, precise rollout plans with percentages and ramp gates, and antipattern detection. Works for AI features, SaaS, mobile apps, and traditional software.

Checks how well a Linear cycle is prepared. Reports per-person load in working days against available days, tickets with no estimate, tickets nobody is assigned to, oversized tickets that need splitting, work that did not finish last cycle, on-call rotation cost, and how groomed the backlog behind the cycle is. Invoke when the user says "cyclotic", "cyclotic prep", "cyclotic prep next", "cyclotic review", "cyclotic init", "cyclotic configure", "cyclotic for" a person's name, "cyclotic show cards", "cyclotic list tickets", "cyclotic explain" a person's name, or adds "-v" or "verbose" to any of those. Also invoke when the user asks whether a cycle or sprint is ready, who is over or under capacity, what carried over from last cycle, which tickets still need estimates, how the backlog looks going into planning, what is in the cycle and at what sizes, or how one person's load adds up. Read-only against Linear.