Results for “plan-review”

Generates a step-by-step construction plan from a one-line objective, where each step is self-contained and executable by a fresh agent in a new session.

Review any business decision, plan, or strategy through the minimalist entrepreneur lens, providing a gut-check and simplification advice.

Use this when reviewing a feature, service, API, auth design, integration, job system, or deployment plan for security weaknesses, unsafe trust assumptions, input risks, or privilege issues.

Guides a structured requirements workflow from topic intake through brainstorming, spec and plan writing, user review, SRS generation, validation, and improvement reporting.

Guides a structured software requirements specification workflow from topic intake through brainstorming, spec writing, planning, review, SRS generation, validation, and improvement reporting.

Guides a structured requirements pipeline from topic intake through brainstorming, spec writing, planning, user review, SRS generation, validation, and improvement reporting.

Turns product ideas into structured specs for AI tools or stakeholder review, with quick feature specs and full project scopes.

Justfile authoring, reviewing, and planning for the just command runner. Use when creating new justfiles, adding recipes, reviewing existing justfiles for quality, planning recipe sets for new projects, or upgrading justfiles as projects mature. Covers syntax patterns, module system, recipe groups, language-specific templates, and maturity assessment.

Interviews users relentlessly about a plan or design until reaching shared understanding, resolving each branch of the decision tree.

Guides a structured requirements pipeline from topic intake through brainstorming, spec and plan writing, user review, SRS generation, validation, and improvement reporting.

Interviews the user one question at a time to stress-test a plan or design, exploring the codebase when possible, until reaching a shared understanding.

Agent profile for review iOS SwiftUI code, platform conventions, state flow, accessibility, performance, and App Store readiness. Use when Codex needs a specialist agent perspective for planning, implementation, review, debugging, validation, or handoff in this domain.

Agent profile for review Android Compose code, lifecycle, permissions, navigation, Material behavior, performance, and Play release risks. Use when Codex needs a specialist agent perspective for planning, implementation, review, debugging, validation, or handoff in this domain.

Use to staff and schedule QA reviewers for sustainable throughput without grading quality collapsing — fatigue, drift, and false precision from treating reviewers like production agents. Trigger for "how many QA reviewers do we need", reviewer capacity planning, grader fatigue, throughput per reviewer, calibration after long shifts, or scores drifting over the course of a day.

Designs and maintains versioned reusable task sequences in Financial Services Cloud using Action Plan templates for client onboarding, account opening, annual review preparation, and compliance tasks.

Audit database schema for consistency, validation, and industry standards. Use when reviewing schema design, naming conventions, constraints, indexes, or migrations. Destructive-op gates → plan-data-integrity. Who-can-read-what RLS → plan-rls-audit. Restore/RPO → plan-backup-dr.

Structures a bounded spec-build-review development loop with explicit scope, stop conditions, and human approval gates for risky or ambiguous work.

Create structured plans for multi-step tasks -- software features, research workflows, events, study plans, or any goal that benefits from breakdown. Also deepens existing plans with interactive sub-agent review. Use when the user says 'plan this', 'create a plan', 'how should we build', 'break this down', or when a brainstorm doc is ready for planning. Use 'deepen the plan' or 'deepening pass' for the deepening flow. For exploratory requests, prefer ce-brainstorm first.

Design finalization: generates production-quality Pretext-native HTML/CSS. Works with approved mockups from /design-shotgun, CEO plans from /plan-ceo-review, design review context from /plan-design-review, or from scratch with a user description. Text actually reflows, heights are computed, layouts are dynamic. 30KB overhead, zero deps. Smart API routing: picks the right Pretext patterns for each design type. Use when: "finalize this design", "turn this into HTML", "build me a page", "implement this design", or after any planning skill. Proactively suggest when user has approved a design or has a plan ready. (gstack) Voice triggers (speech-to-text aliases): "build the design", "code the mockup", "make it real".

Prepare a Quarterly Business Review deck and narrative that proves value and sets the next quarter's plan.

Interrogates a plan against real third-party documentation, extracting hard constraints and asking doc-cited questions before producing a constraints appendix.

Builds a feature implementation plan from an existing feature specification (or equivalent context) through a facilitated team conversation. Use when the user wants to plan how to implement, build, deliver, or ship a feature that has already been specified. Does not specify what the feature should do — use plan-a-feature first. Does not design the contract for an interface — use design-an-api. Does not refine or stress-test an already-written plan — use iterative-plan-review. Runs its resolution rounds to completion and holds its questions until after they finish; to review each round as it lands, use pairing.

Use when a research implementation plan exists in docs/superpapers/plans/ and the user is ready to execute it — collecting data, running analysis, producing outputs, writing the paper. Orchestrates task execution with replication-driven verification and two-stage review at phase boundaries.

Workflow 1.5: Bridge between idea discovery and auto review. Reads EXPERIMENT_PLAN.md, implements experiment code, deploys to GPU, collects initial results. Use when user says "实现实验", "implement experiments", "bridge", "从计划到跑实验", "deploy the plan", or has an experiment plan ready to execute.

Orchestrates building a new feature end-to-end by delegating research, planning, TDD implementation, review, and gated commit to specialized agents.

Interrogates research plans before evals or published claims, forcing explicit null hypotheses, confound checks, and data verification across four review waves.

Plan-driven implementation in Sage/Acorn — reads docs/plans/ directory, implements components from approved sub-plans, runs scaffold generators (lando acorn acf:block), commits incrementally, auto-invokes block-scaffolding per ACF block, runs lando flush and lando theme-build after changes; full PR workflow with sage-reviewer gate. Invoke for: "/building", "implement from the plan", "implement from the plan", "build from the plan", "execute the plan", "start building", "code this feature". Skip when: there is no approved plan yet — run /architecture-discovery then /plan-generator first.

Autonomously implements large Elixir/Phoenix features end-to-end: discovers complexity, plans with specialist agents, implements with verification, reviews code, and cycles back on issues.

Creates a pull request from completed phase work, generates a rich PR body from planning artifacts, optionally runs code review, and prepares for merge.

Use when main results pass result-to-claim (claim_supported=yes or partial) and ablation studies are needed for paper submission. Codex designs ablations from a reviewer's perspective, CC reviews feasibility and implements.

Turns a one-line objective into a step-by-step construction plan for multi-session, multi-agent engineering projects, with self-contained context briefs, adversarial review, and dependency graphs.

Spawns GLM-5 powered teammates with thinking mode for coding, review, testing, planning, and research tasks.

Review pull requests or audit repositories for correctness, security, performance, test risk, architecture, dependencies, developer experience, documentation, and grounded product direction. Use for code review, repository audits, evidence-backed findings, false-positive vetting, risk assessment, prioritization, or deciding which improvements should become implementation plans.

Generate a step-by-step construction plan from a one-line objective, with dependency graphs, parallel step detection, and adversarial review for multi-session engineering projects.

Builds an evidence-backed ECC install plan for a repository by sorting skills, commands, rules, hooks, and extras into DAILY vs LIBRARY buckets using parallel repo-aware review passes.

Agent profile for plan PPC account structure, creative testing, budget hypotheses, measurement, and landing-page alignment. Use when Codex needs a specialist agent perspective for planning, implementation, review, debugging, validation, or handoff in this domain.