Results for “plan-review”

Use when all plan tasks are done and green to review, archive planning artifacts, and ask how to finish.

Use when all plan tasks are done and green to review, archive planning artifacts, and ask how to finish.

Use when you have a written implementation plan to execute in a separate session with review checkpoints

Use when you have a written implementation plan to execute in a separate session with review checkpoints

Use when you have a written implementation plan to execute in a separate session with review checkpoints

Loads an implementation plan, reviews it critically, executes each task with verification, and reports completion, stopping to ask for help when blocked.

Executes implementation plans by dispatching a fresh subagent per task and running two-stage reviews for spec compliance and code quality.

Loads a written implementation plan, reviews it critically, executes all tasks with verification, and reports completion, stopping to ask for help when blocked.

Write or review Terraform with clean versioned modules, locked remote state, drift detection, and disciplined plan review before apply.

Runs a structured interview session to sharpen a plan or design through relentless questioning.

Executes a written implementation plan in a separate session, reviewing it critically, running tasks with verification, and stopping to ask for help when blocked.

Defines a gated Research-Plan-TDD-Review-Commit pipeline for orchestrating feature development, defect fixes, and refactoring tasks through composable phases and human approval gates.

Full autonomous research workflow — brainstorm, plan, implement, review, and document

Use when planning an ACL project calendar across ACL Rolling Review cycles, covering cycle selection against conference commitment windows, backward planning from an ARR deadline, the review-response-meta-review timeline, commitment decisions, resubmission loops to later cycles, and camera-ready through ACL Anthology publication.

Opens plans and HTML artifacts in a local browser canvas where the human annotates elements, chats, and approves or requests changes without leaving the page. Use when presenting a plan for review, or when feedback like "move this, change that" is easier pointed at than typed.

Produce a standalone test plan by analyzing code for test coverage gaps and edge cases. Use when you need to create, generate, or draft a test plan for a branch, need to analyze test coverage, or need to identify what tests to write for specific files or directories. Does not produce a plain-language plan for a person to run tests by hand — use manual-test-planning for that. Does not write test code — use tdd to implement behavior test-first. Does not refine existing plans — use iterative-plan-review. Does not review code quality, security, or style — use code-review for full code review. Does not evaluate architectural testability or structural coupling — use architectural-analysis for architectural assessment.

Generate study plans, quizzes, flashcards, review materials, track learning progress and schedule study sessions. Use when users ask to create study plans, generate quiz questions, make flashcards, track study progress, or schedule review sessions for any topic.

Dispatches a code-reviewer subagent to evaluate work against requirements and plan, then acts on the feedback before merging.

Provides HR business partner guidance for organizational planning, hiring, performance management, talent reviews, and employee relations, with templates for role design, interview rubrics, onboarding plans, and communication.

Run the full cenci plan, test, implementation, review, and pull-request pipeline.

Creates detailed, sectionized implementation plans through research, stakeholder interviews, and multi-LLM review. Use when planning features that need thorough pre-implementation analysis.

Creates detailed, sectionized implementation plans through research, stakeholder interviews, and multi-LLM review. Use when planning features that need thorough pre-implementation analysis.

Creates detailed, sectionized implementation plans through research, stakeholder interviews, and multi-LLM review. Use when planning features that need thorough pre-implementation analysis.

Use this agent when a major project step has been completed and needs to be reviewed against the original plan and coding standards.

Generate a structured paper outline from review conclusions and experiment results. Use when user says "写大纲", "paper outline", "plan the paper", "论文规划", or wants to create a paper plan before writing.

Stress-test a plan or design by interviewing the user relentlessly about every aspect until reaching a shared understanding.

Designs analytics architecture, plans events, defines KPIs, sets attribution boundaries, and reviews instrumentation across product and growth.

Identifies Oracle-to-PostgreSQL migration risks by cross-referencing code against known behavioral differences. Use when planning a database migration, reviewing migration artifacts, or validating integration test coverage.

Review an entire codebase for architecture, engineering health, and exploitable risk; generate a prioritized remediation plan, an evidence-anchored system knowledge document, or both.

Use this when reviewing a full system design, architecture plan, or cross-service implementation for operational risk, boundary clarity, security posture, deployability, and maintainability.

Executes a phased implementation plan by deploying subagents for implementation, verification, anti-pattern checks, code quality review, and committing.

Plan new YouTube videos with optimized titles, thumbnails, and hooks. Use when planning a video, writing or reviewing opening hooks, generating title and thumbnail concepts, or creating a production-ready video plan backed by research.

Launches four parallel adversarial review agents covering security, scope, fidelity, and test gaps, then synthesizes findings into a ranked verdict for plans or feature branches.

Prepare GPT-pro-ready proof planning or diagnosis bundles from a user's idea, packaging claims, sources, givens, and open questions for review without solving gaps locally.

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 expansions), HOLD SCOPE (maximum rigor), SCOPE REDUCTION (strip to essentials). Use when asked to "think bigger", "expand scope", "strategy review", "rethink this", or "is this ambitious enough". Proactively suggest when the user is questioning scope or ambition of a plan, or when the plan feels like it could be thinking bigger. (gstack)

Subjects every non-trivial decision to a fresh-context adversarial review before it stands, prioritizing correctness over speed for high-stakes or unfamiliar code.