Results for “plan-review”

Produce a plain-language manual test plan from the context supplied to it — an executive summary, a high-level list of named tests, and a detail section per test with the steps a person follows by hand and the outcomes they should expect. Use when you want to create, draft, generate, or outline a manual test plan, manual QA steps, hands-on verification steps, or an acceptance walkthrough for a feature, change, branch, plan, or PR. When the plan holds more than five tests and at least two natural categories emerge, both the test list and the detail sections are organized under plain-language categories. When nothing in the supplied context can be manually tested, it says so and asks for more context instead of producing a document. Does not analyze code for automated test coverage gaps — use automated-test-planning. Does not write test code — use tdd. Does not review code quality — use code-review. Does not stress-test an existing plan — use iterative-plan-review.

Engineering observability and reliability: SLO/SLI design, distributed tracing, alerting, dashboards, capacity planning, toil automation, reliability review. Use for instrumentation or SLO definition.

Agent profile for review API platform contracts, versioning, auth, rate limits, SDK clients, and developer experience. Use when Codex needs a specialist agent perspective for planning, implementation, review, debugging, validation, or handoff in this domain.

Agent profile for review pricing, invoices, subscriptions, entitlements, revenue logic, tax-sensitive flows, and billing UX. Use when Codex needs a specialist agent perspective for planning, implementation, review, debugging, validation, or handoff in this domain.

Agent profile for review prompt injection, tool boundaries, untrusted content, data exfiltration, and human approval gates. Use when Codex needs a specialist agent perspective for planning, implementation, review, debugging, validation, or handoff in this domain.

Break a trusted implementation plan (or other provided context) into independently-grabbable, atomic work items, written to a single work-items.md file. Use when the user wants to convert a plan into work items, create implementation tickets or tasks, divide a plan into work units, or break the plan down into grabbable pieces. Do not use when there is no implementation plan yet or the plan is not yet trusted — use plan-implementation to produce the plan or iterative-plan-review to harden it first. Does not sequence work into demoable delivery phases — use plan-a-phased-build for that. Does not write code — use tdd to implement a work item.

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.

Write code through a disciplined, BDD-framed Test-Driven Development loop: build a behavior test list, then drive each behavior through red-green-refactor with an enforced observed-failure gate. Use when the user wants to implement, build, or write code test-first, "do TDD", follow "red-green-refactor", drive code from tests, choose the next test by the Transformation Priority Premise (TPP) or ZOMBIES ordering, or grow a feature behavior-by-behavior with tests leading. This skill writes and changes code; it does not produce a test plan document (use automated-test-planning, or manual-test-planning for a plan a person runs by hand), review or audit existing code (use code-review), restructure existing code outside a TDD loop (use refactor), specify what a feature should do (use plan-a-feature), or find the root cause of a bug (use investigate). Runs its loop to completion without pausing for review; to review each behavior as it lands, use pairing.

`analysis-agent`/`task-agent`/`review-agent`: discover source of truth, candidate owner, and change surface before planning; hand known candidates to impact inspection.

Prepare PRINCE2 Closing a Project material: product acceptance, end project report, lessons report, benefits review plan, handover, follow-on actions, and closure recommendation.

Use when planning a PLDI campaign across its annual clock — backward-planning from the November deadline through winter reviewing, the February response window, March notification, post-acceptance artifact evaluation, PACMPL production, and the June conference, with owners for each deliverable.

Use when the user asks to run Gemini CLI for code review, plan review, or big context (>200k) processing. Ideal for comprehensive analysis requiring large context windows. Uses Gemini 3 Pro by default for state-of-the-art reasoning and coding.

Use when the user asks to run Gemini CLI for code review, plan review, or big context (>200k) processing. Ideal for comprehensive analysis requiring large context windows. Uses Gemini 3 Pro by default for state-of-the-art reasoning and coding.

Design, implement, audit, and plan interface animation and motion systems. Use for animation reviews, motion audits, easing and duration decisions, gesture physics, transform origins, reduced-motion behavior, animation performance, SvelteKit or Motion integration, perceptual feel checks, or self-contained animation improvement plans.

Use when the user asks to run Gemini CLI for code review, plan review, or big context (>200k) processing. Ideal for comprehensive analysis requiring large context windows. Uses Gemini 3 Pro by default for state-of-the-art reasoning and coding.

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

Analyze the available skill set and recommend candidate groups that could be consolidated into sub-skill bundles. Read-only — proposes a plan, does not move files.

Designer's eye QA: finds visual inconsistency, spacing issues, hierarchy problems, AI slop patterns, and slow interactions — then fixes them. Iteratively fixes issues in source code, committing each fix atomically and re-verifying with before/after screenshots. For plan-mode design review (before implementation), use /plan-design-review. Use when asked to "audit the design", "visual QA", "check if it looks good", or "design polish". Proactively suggest when the user mentions visual inconsistencies or wants to polish the look of a live site. (gstack)

Prepare the PRINCE2 Starting Up a Project material: mandate review, project brief, outline business case, project product description, initiation stage plan, lessons, and startup decisions.

Delivers a small, bounded code change through inspection, a mini-plan, implementation, testing, review, and adversarial verification. Use for bug fixes, configuration changes, and features expected to touch no more than five files.

Get a second opinion from Claude Code. Use from Codex when you want to cross-check your reasoning, validate a plan, or get an independent review from Claude.

Run the full autonomous shipping pipeline end-to-end, hands-off with no check-ins: plan, implement, review and fix, commit, push a branch, open a PR, and watch CI to green. Use only when the user explicitly asks to build or ship something autonomously all the way to an open PR, or invokes lfg directly — it pushes and opens a PR without stopping. Not for in-the-loop work where the user reviews each step: use ce-plan to plan, ce-work to implement a plan, ce-debug to fix a bug, or ce-commit-push-pr to commit and open a PR for existing changes.

Drafts Qualified Domestic Relations Orders (QDROs) compliant with ERISA §206(d)(3) and IRC §414(p) to divide retirement benefits in divorce. Covers defined benefit pensions, 401(k)s, and defined contribution plans with plan-specific division formulas and alternate payee protections. Use when drafting QDROs, dividing retirement assets post-judgment, or preparing domestic relations orders for plan administrator review.

Use for the search-planning stage of a literature review, when database lanes and language layers must be chosen, when DOI coverage policy is unclear, or when inclusion and exclusion criteria need drafting before any source is read; not for running the screening and PRISMA pipeline of a formal review, which is prisma-scoping-review-pipeline.

Protocol-level two-agent paper writing workflow. Use when the user wants Codex to plan and review from global context while DeepSeek writes or revises the manuscript through the global deepseek-agent skill, with muxing-style-review used for explicit prose style checks.

Use when planning an AAAI project timeline from topic selection through abstract, OpenReview submission, two-phase review, rebuttal, decision, camera-ready, registration, presentation, and public artifact release.

Plan and execute multi-channel marketing campaigns from audience research through positioning, copywriting, and review. Orchestrates landing pages, email sequences, social posts, video scripts, ad copy, and content calendars for product launches.

Build work collaboratively in reviewable pieces, handing each piece back for review before starting the next, so the person stays in the lead and steers while the work happens instead of reviewing a finished result. Use when someone says to pair with them on something, asks to collaborate rather than direct, wants to review as it goes, or wants to guide the work piece by piece — on code, on a design decision, or on writing. For a test-first build it runs tdd, for restructuring it runs refactor, for an interface contract it runs design-an-api, and for plan work it runs iterative-plan-review or plan-implementation, each collaboratively; invoke any of those directly instead to run it straight through without pausing. Does not pace someone through code that already exists and builds nothing — use code-walkthrough. Does not explain, summarize, or research something instead of producing it — use code-overview or research.

Experimental methodology and statistical rigor specialist. Use when the user asks to talk to Breach, requests the methodologist, or needs experiment design review, ablation planning, and reproducibility protocols.

Analyse student work against criteria to identify specific gaps between current performance and learning objectives. Use when reviewing submissions, planning feedback, or diagnosing learning needs.

Use when planning an HPCA project timeline from venue fit through the two-step July registration and paper gate, the autumn review wait, the single rebuttal/revision window, notification, IEEE camera-ready, artifact evaluation, and the February/March talk, with backward-planning offsets for a hardware-evaluated paper.

Summarize Microsoft Teams conversations, triage unread or recent activity, draft follow-ups, and manage Planner tasks through connected Teams data. Use when the user wants to review chats or channels, identify owners and next steps, prepare a safe reply or post, or turn Teams follow-ups into Microsoft Planner tasks.

Design and implement clear, modular, resilient software and create executor-grade implementation plans with explicit scope, drift checks, verification gates, tests, STOP conditions, dependencies, and delegated-work review. Use for development, refactoring, architecture, implementation planning, safe migrations, handoffs to another engineer or agent, or verifying delegated code changes.

Break a work-items.md file (produced by /plan-work-items) into independently-grabbable GitHub issues, one per slice, in each slice's target repo. Use when you want to turn a work-items file into GitHub issues, publish work items as issue tickets, or create implementation tickets that can be worked on and tracked on GitHub. Does not produce the work-items file itself — use plan-work-items to break a plan into work items first. Does not review code or post pull request comments — use post-code-review-to-pr for that.

Use when building or planning Firebase Cloud Functions for webhooks, backend APIs, scheduled jobs, claim assignment, or privileged Firestore logic. Trigger on requests to create or review Firebase Functions.

Use when planning an ICRA submission calendar end to end — the September paper deadline, the two video-attachment windows, winter review silence, late-January notification, March camera-ready, and the May/June conference — or when interleaving a fallback RA-L or IROS plan around the single annual ICRA shot.