# review-plan

> Reviews development plans for gaps, hidden assumptions, critical misses, and XP violations, then presents prioritized findings for confirmation.

- Skill: `sdiamante13/review-plan` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds add sdiamante13/review-plan`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/sdiamante13/review-plan/raw
- Safety review: CAUTION (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector PASS)
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Product & Planning, Coding & Dev Tools, Code Review, Prioritization & Backlog
- Tags: Code Review, Plan Review, Xp, Yagni
- Author: SDiamante13 (https://skillmd.com/u/sdiamante13)
- Updated: 2026-08-22
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/sdiamante13/review-plan

---


# XP Plan Review

STARTER_CHARACTER = 👁️

## Activation Triggers

- "review the plan"
- "/review-plan"
- "check the plan"
- "audit the plan"

## Process

### 1. Find the Plan

Search for plan files:
- Recent plan in context window user is referring to
- `.claude/plans/`
- `plans/`
- `docs/plans/`
- File mentioned by user

If multiple found, ask which one.

### 2. Run the Review Workflow

The multi-agent review — one independent reviewer per lens (Gaps, Hidden
Assumptions, Critical Misses, plus the five XP Violations: YAGNI, Simplicity,
Step Size, Feedback Loops, Tech Debt), dedup, and an adversarial-verify pass
where skeptics vote to kill unconvincing findings — is encoded as a
**deterministic Workflow** so the fan-out, dedup, and verification run reliably
instead of relying on prose. The reviewers are `Plan` agents, exactly as before.

Invoke the `Workflow` tool with the bundled script, passing whichever plan
reference you resolved in step 1 (`path` for a file, or `plan` for raw text):

```
Workflow({
  scriptPath: "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/review-plan/workflow.js",
  args: { path: "[PATH]" }   // or { plan: "[plan text]" }
})
```

The workflow runs two phases (both autonomous — no human gate):

- **Review (8 parallel Plan reviewers, independent):** one per lens — Gaps in
  Knowledge · Hidden Assumptions · Critical Misses · YAGNI · Simplicity · Step
  Size · Feedback Loops · Tech Debt. Each returns findings with issue, impact,
  recommendation, and priority (critical > important > nice-to-have). Empty /
  issue-less findings are dropped; near-duplicate findings across lenses are merged.
- **Verify (adversarial skeptics, Haiku, one per unique finding):** each skeptic
  tries to KILL the finding — assumes false positive until the plan's content
  proves otherwise. Findings the skeptic votes down or scores below 50 confidence
  are dropped.

It returns `{ findings }` — the merged, ranked list (priority then confidence),
where each kept finding carries `{ issue, impact, recommendation, priority, lenses, confidence, justification }`.

### 3. Present and Confirm

After the workflow returns, present the kept findings to the user (group by
priority: critical > important > nice-to-have). If `findings` is empty, tell the
user the plan passed review and stop.

Use AskUserQuestion:
```
Question: "Based on these [N] issues, how would you like to proceed?"
Header: "Update Plan"
Options:
  - "Fix all" - Update plan to address all issues
  - "Select items" - Choose specific issues to address
  - "Skip" - Keep plan as-is
```

### 4. Update Plan (Only After Confirmation)

If user confirms:
- Make targeted edits
- Keep changes minimal
- Preserve original structure