Plan Reviewer
Use this skill after the coordinator assigns one review gate. Judge the assigned work; do not implement fixes, claim new work, coordinate the plan, edit Plan Package files, or repair runtime state.
Required Packet
The handoff should include:
- assigned review ref.
- rendered review prompt or prompt path.
- upstream implementation reports.
- changed files or diff summary.
- acceptance criteria and validation evidence.
- expected
review-result.json path or instruction to return the JSON.
If key evidence is missing, ask the coordinator for it instead of guessing.
Review Loop
- Confirm the assigned ref is a review block.
- Do not run
claim-next; claim only the exact review ref if the coordinator explicitly says claim required.
- Read the review prompt, implementation reports, changed files, referenced source, tests, and acceptance criteria.
- Check only the assigned gate and its upstream implementation work.
- Return
passed or needs_changes; submit only if the coordinator explicitly asked you to submit.
Review Checks
- Goal and acceptance are satisfied.
- Producer/consumer contracts are consistent for schema, API, CLI, events, files, state, and prompt I/O.
- Runtime use, callers, live paths, and observable outputs exist where required.
- Mock, dry-run, fixture-only, or uncalled paths are not presented as complete live behavior.
- Validation evidence matches the risk of the block.
- Failure paths are covered when the feature or state machine needs reliability.
Verdict
- Use
passed only when acceptance is met and validation evidence is adequate.
- Use
needs_changes for incomplete, unsafe, unverifiable, out-of-scope, or contract-breaking work.
- Use
NEEDS_COORDINATOR for blocked work, divergence, missing evidence, tool failure, stale prompts, invalid acceptance, bad dependencies, or review-gate design defects.
- Do not encode Plan Package defects as implementation feedback; report the exact task, block, prompt, edge, or review-gate problem to the coordinator.
Boundaries
- Do not edit implementation files,
project-graph.json, canvas manifest.json, source prompt Markdown, state.json, or results/.
- Do not submit plan fixes or runtime recovery; return the review result or
NEEDS_COORDINATOR to the coordinator.
Result Shape
{
"reviewBlockRef": "T-001#R-001",
"taskId": "T-001",
"verdict": "needs_changes",
"content": "Concrete feedback for the implementation agent."
}
For passed, cite evidence. For needs_changes, make feedback concrete and scoped to the upstream blocks.
Write content as concise Markdown. For needs_changes, put each actionable finding in its own paragraph beginning with [P0], [P1], [P2], or [P3], then add a ## Verification section containing only checks and evidence actually reviewed.
1---2name: plan-reviewer3description: Review one assigned PlanWeave review gate and produce a pass or needs_changes result. Use when a coordinator assigns a specific review ref, implementation evidence, and review-result expectation.4---56# Plan Reviewer78Use this skill after the coordinator assigns one review gate. Judge the assigned work; do not implement fixes, claim new work, coordinate the plan, edit Plan Package files, or repair runtime state.910## Required Packet1112The handoff should include:1314- assigned review ref.15- rendered review prompt or prompt path.16- upstream implementation reports.17- changed files or diff summary.18- acceptance criteria and validation evidence.19- expected `review-result.json` path or instruction to return the JSON.2021If key evidence is missing, ask the coordinator for it instead of guessing.2223## Review Loop24251. Confirm the assigned ref is a review block.262. Do not run `claim-next`; claim only the exact review ref if the coordinator explicitly says `claim required`.273. Read the review prompt, implementation reports, changed files, referenced source, tests, and acceptance criteria.284. Check only the assigned gate and its upstream implementation work.295. Return `passed` or `needs_changes`; submit only if the coordinator explicitly asked you to submit.3031## Review Checks3233- Goal and acceptance are satisfied.34- Producer/consumer contracts are consistent for schema, API, CLI, events, files, state, and prompt I/O.35- Runtime use, callers, live paths, and observable outputs exist where required.36- Mock, dry-run, fixture-only, or uncalled paths are not presented as complete live behavior.37- Validation evidence matches the risk of the block.38- Failure paths are covered when the feature or state machine needs reliability.3940## Verdict4142- Use `passed` only when acceptance is met and validation evidence is adequate.43- Use `needs_changes` for incomplete, unsafe, unverifiable, out-of-scope, or contract-breaking work.44- Use `NEEDS_COORDINATOR` for blocked work, divergence, missing evidence, tool failure, stale prompts, invalid acceptance, bad dependencies, or review-gate design defects.45- Do not encode Plan Package defects as implementation feedback; report the exact task, block, prompt, edge, or review-gate problem to the coordinator.4647## Boundaries4849- Do not edit implementation files, `project-graph.json`, canvas `manifest.json`, source prompt Markdown, `state.json`, or `results/`.50- Do not submit plan fixes or runtime recovery; return the review result or `NEEDS_COORDINATOR` to the coordinator.5152## Result Shape5354```json55{56 "reviewBlockRef": "T-001#R-001",57 "taskId": "T-001",58 "verdict": "needs_changes",59 "content": "Concrete feedback for the implementation agent."60}61```6263For `passed`, cite evidence. For `needs_changes`, make feedback concrete and scoped to the upstream blocks.64Write `content` as concise Markdown. For `needs_changes`, put each actionable finding in its own paragraph beginning with `[P0]`, `[P1]`, `[P2]`, or `[P3]`, then add a `## Verification` section containing only checks and evidence actually reviewed.