Results for “plan-review”

Build an evidence-backed ECC install plan for a specific repo by sorting skills, commands, rules, hooks, and extras into DAILY vs LIBRARY buckets using parallel repo-aware review passes. Use when ECC should be trimmed to what a project actually needs instead of loading the full bundle.

| Use when starting a chain from a GitHub issue — turning an issue URL or number into a triaged, planned, dispatched, and reviewed pull request. Classifies the thread (bug → root-cause discipline, feature → plan chain, question → drafted reply), synthesizes a spec from the issue's own acceptance criteria, then runs the standard chain with a PR exit. Trigger with /hyperflow:issue, "work on issue #N", "fix this issue <url>", "implement this issue", "triage issue #N and raise a PR".

Composite skill — full project health check across testing, config, hooks, performance, security, MCP, and plugins. Runs the audit skills in parallel and reconciles into one severity-ranked report with prioritized remediation plan. Use weekly per active project, before major releases, or as part of quarterly tech-debt review.

Route local Git work into the safest next move: branch hygiene, selective staging, commit cleanup, merge-vs-rebase choice, conflict resolution, lease-safe pushes, and recovery from resets or bad history edits. Use when the user needs help preparing a branch, cleaning up commits, syncing with an updated base, resolving local Git conflicts, pushing rewritten history safely, recovering lost commits, or getting a diff ready for review. Not for hosted PR review, repo administration, or sprint planning.

Run the full autonomous engineering pipeline end-to-end (plan, work, code review, test, commit, push, open PR, watch CI, fix CI failures until green). Use only when the user explicitly requests hands-off execution of a software task and provides a feature description; do not auto-route casual conversation here.

Use when planning a CoRL submission cycle end to end — the late-May abstract and paper deadlines, the summer review window, first-round rejection risk, the August one-page rebuttal and discussion period, autumn decisions, the October PMLR camera-ready, and the November conference — including what to do between milestones.

Manage, inventory, standardize, migrate, and test reusable Codex skills for the MetaSkill repository. Use when Codex needs to inspect local skills, convert a personal workflow into a public skill candidate, normalize skill folder shape, plan skill promotion, or decide whether a skill belongs in skill-management, publication-review, or skill-examples.

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.

YC Office Hours — two modes. Startup mode: six forcing questions that expose demand reality, status quo, desperate specificity, narrowest wedge, observation, and future-fit. Builder mode: design thinking brainstorming for side projects, hackathons, learning, and open source. Saves a design doc. Use when asked to "brainstorm this", "I have an idea", "help me think through this", "office hours", or "is this worth building". Proactively invoke this skill (do NOT answer directly) when the user describes a new product idea, asks whether something is worth building, wants to think through design decisions for something that doesn't exist yet, or is exploring a concept before any code is written. Use before /plan-ceo-review or /plan-eng-review. (gstack)

Use when planning a COLM submission campaign across the calendar — working backward from the late-March abstract and paper deadlines through the May-June rebuttal, July decisions, August camera-ready, and October conference, coordinating co-authors, compute, and reciprocal-reviewing duties, and slotting COLM into a multi-venue LM-research pipeline.

Use to find duplicate or repeated support conversations and produce a reviewable merge plan. Trigger for "find duplicate tickets", "customers contacting us twice about the same thing", deduplicating a helpdesk, cleaning up ticket volume, or measuring how much of your contact volume is the same issue submitted more than once.

Use when planning an ACM PODC campaign end to end — running the single annual cycle backward from the February deadline through abstract registration, lightweight double-blind review, the late-April notification, the May camera-ready, and the arXiv full version — and coordinating the regular-paper-vs-Brief-Announcement decision along the way.

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.

Use when planning an ICDM (IEEE International Conference on Data Mining) project timeline from venue fit through the abstract and full-paper deadlines, the long summer wait to the August notification, the no-rebuttal review, the possible short-paper acceptance branch, IEEE camera-ready, and in-person presentation on a single annual deadline.

Use when planning a full ISCA campaign on a calendar — working back from the expected mid-November abstract and paper deadlines to freeze simulation evidence in time, staffing the winter two-round review wait, preparing for the February-March rebuttal and revision window, and branching to camera-ready, artifacts, and the June conference.

Google and Meta paid media account structure evaluation. Audits campaign/ad set architecture against conversion volume minimums, budget thresholds, and targeting overlap. Identifies over-segmentation, under-segmentation, budget fragmentation, and structural anti-patterns blocking algorithmic learning. Provides consolidation roadmaps with migration plans. Use when inheriting accounts, quarterly health checks, or before scaling budgets.

Inspect Heroku logs and configure persistent log forwarding safely. Use when the agent needs to review recent Heroku logs, plan or change log forwarding, inspect a drain target, add or remove classic log drains for Common Runtime apps, inspect current drain configuration, or choose between legacy drains and Fir telemetry workflows on Heroku.

Use when planning an ATC (ACM SIGOPS Annual Technical Conference, formerly USENIX ATC) campaign end to end — running the year backward from the early-June deadline through the two review rounds, the rebuttal, conditional-acceptance shepherding, the post-acceptance artifact evaluation, and the ACM Open Access camera-ready for the November Hong Kong conference.

Use when planning an ICLR project timeline from topic selection through OpenReview submission, discussion, revision, decision, camera-ready, poster, video, and public artifact release. Use when sequencing milestones against the current cycle's OpenReview deadlines, budgeting time for the long public discussion phase, or assigning owners for anonymity audits and reviewer-verifiable evidence paths.

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.

Hard readiness gate before implementation begins — cross-checks the constitution, feature spec, plan, and tasks for consistency, traceability, and unresolved ambiguity. Returns PASS or FAIL with specific findings. Load when the spec-driven-development orchestrator routes /analyze, when the user asks to cross-check spec vs plan, audit traceability, verify spec readiness, gate-check before implementation, or says "is this spec implementation-ready", "trace requirements to tasks", "/analyze", "spec sanity check", "spec readiness gate", "spec consistency check". Output: docs/reviews/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>-spec-crosscheck.md.

Systematic strategic planning framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers targeting preprint platforms (PhilArchive, arXiv, PhilSci-Archive). Use when users want to: (1) plan a paper on a specific topic, (2) identify research gaps and assess originality, (3) develop optimized paper outlines, (4) prepare for preprint submission, or (5) understand platform requirements and writing standards. Triggered by phrases like 'plan a paper on,' 'help me design a paper about,' 'identify research gaps in,' 'is this idea original,' or when users need structured research planning. The skill guides through three phases: Platform Analysis (identifying target venue and studying sample papers), Theoretical Framework (AI-driven literature search and gap identification), and Outline Optimization (structured design with reviewer-perspective self-assessment). Each phase includes quality evaluation standards and validation checkpoints. Output: optimized detailed outline ready for systematic writing (use with acade

Create or amend a self-contained PowerPoint-like HTML briefing slide deck for alignment pages, interrogation questions, research findings, framework/workshop artifacts, specs, reports, or documentation plans. Use when Codex should make review material more visual and navigable while preserving dense alignment/interrogation pages and source documents as linked references instead of auto-opening them.

Composite skill — full security pass across secrets, dependencies, code paths, and OWASP risks. Chains security-audit (broad) + socket-audit (npm supply chain) + semgrep (pattern scan) + code-security (code review for vulns) in parallel, reconciles into one severity-ranked report with remediation plan. Use quarterly per active repo or before any release of security-sensitive code.

Audit, plan, implement, or review Model Context Protocol version and SDK migrations. Use for MCP 2026-07-28, stateless Streamable HTTP, server/discover, removal of initialize or Mcp-Session-Id, MCP Tasks extension changes, full JSON Schema 2020-12 tool schemas, OAuth issuer hardening, deprecated roots/sampling/logging, or cross-version client/server compatibility.

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.

Use to design support incentives that improve behaviour without destroying the metric — pairing pay with guardrails, naming gaming modes, and choosing measures that survive Goodhart pressure. Trigger for "incentive plan", "agent bonus scheme", "SPIFF design", "pay for QA score", "what metric should we bonus", CSAT incentives, or reviewing whether a comp change is driving gaming.

Use when planning or sequencing an ICML manuscript workflow end to end - from topic selection and drafting through OpenReview submission, double-blind review, author response, camera-ready, PMLR publication, public original-submission release, and rerouting decisions. Use when you need the next ICML skill, the official page to reopen, or the blocking gap for the current stage.

Supervises theses and dissertations end to end — structure guidance from proposal through defense, chapter-by-chapter writing support (introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion), supervision strategies, committee management, defense and viva voce preparation, timeline planning, feedback integration, examiner-expectation guidance, and formatting (APA 7, Chicago, university styles). Use when the request mentions thesis, dissertation, supervision, defense preparation, viva, proposal defense, thesis structure, thesis chapter, literature review chapter, methodology chapter, results chapter, discussion chapter, thesis timeline, committee, thesis formatting, or dissertation proposal. Part of the AlterLab Academic Skills suite.

Validate process decomposition and architecture design quality before execution begins. Load when the setup-evaluator agent fires (automatic for agent-chain tasks), or when user says "evaluate this setup", "check the decomposition", "validate the architecture", "is this plan sound", "review the agent design". Catches structural errors, missing knowledge, unrealistic step ordering, and topology mismatches. Does NOT modify — only evaluates.

Structured threat modeling skill using the PASTA framework (Process for Attack Simulation and Threat Analysis) combined with Adam Shostack's 4-question framework. Use this skill whenever the user asks to do threat modeling, security analysis, map the attack surface, identify threats, or review an application for security risks — even if they don't mention PASTA or a specific framework by name. Core activities: Component Mapping (architecture + data flows), Critical Assessment (business impact prioritization), and Logic Flaw Identification (attacker mindset on business logic). Produces: component map diagram (Mermaid), data flow diagram (Mermaid), attack tree (Mermaid), STRIDE threat table, prioritized risk register, and an actionable mitigation plan. Invoke proactively for any security review, architecture review, or "what could go wrong?" session.

Terraform infrastructure-as-code agent skill and plugin for Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, OpenClaw. Covers module design patterns, state management strategies, provider configuration, security hardening, policy-as-code with Sentinel/OPA, and CI/CD plan/apply workflows. Use when: user wants to design Terraform modules, manage state backends, review Terraform security, implement multi-region deployments, or follow IaC best practices.

Terraform infrastructure-as-code agent skill and plugin for Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, OpenClaw. Covers module design patterns, state management strategies, provider configuration, security hardening, policy-as-code with Sentinel/OPA, and CI/CD plan/apply workflows. Use when: user wants to design Terraform modules, manage state backends, review Terraform security, implement multi-region deployments, or follow IaC best practices.

Cross-channel content production from an approved idea, brief, notes, transcript, or existing asset. Use when the user wants a ready-to-review draft or a small set of adaptations saved into the bootstrap content workspace. For content strategy use content-strategy-and-planning; for specialist LinkedIn, blog, email automation, SEO, landing page, or campaign work use the dedicated skill.

Generate academic research proposals for PhD applications. Use when user asks to "write a research proposal", "create PhD proposal", "generate research plan", "撰写研究计划", "写博士申请", "doctoral proposal", or mentions specific research topics for PhD application. Supports STEM, humanities, and social sciences with field-specific adaptations. Follows Nature Reviews-style academic writing conventions. Supports both English and Chinese output based on user preference.

Personal finance review skill for individuals who want to understand their spending, budgets, and financial patterns. Use whenever the user wants to analyze expenses, categorize spending, review a budget, build a budget from scratch, analyze debt, audit subscriptions, understand their savings rate, or track progress toward a financial goal. Triggers: "help me review my spending", "here are my expenses", "can you look at my budget", "help me build a budget", "I want to understand where my money goes", "categorize these transactions", "help me pay off my debt", "audit my subscriptions", "am I saving enough", "am I on track for my goal", "analyze my finances", or any time the user shares financial data (even raw or messy) and wants insight. Does NOT provide investment, tax, or financial planning advice — helps users understand their own data. Trigger proactively when the user pastes transactions, expenses, or any money-related data, even without an explicit request for analysis.