plan-review
Skill6 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Staff PM contract certifier. Reads an existing PRD and runs a fixed seven-check certification, each check tied to a named downstream consumer. Picks the product check or the eng check from the PRD's content, auto-fixes every Critical and Major, logs Minors without asking, and stops only for a product decision. Writes one AHA learning per auto-fixed Critical/Major so the next plan-pm draft self-heals, logs findings to reports/review-prd-[n]-[slug].md, and ends with one result block. Use it when the user says "certify the PRD", "review the PRD", "check the PRD before plan-em", or invokes /plan-review.
43 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- yubuhui/opencode-self-evolvingtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- bas1l/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 3, 2026
- duncanmorris/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 2, 2026
- vzhukovs/podman-desktop-kittheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- Esi-Abolfazl/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- kopp0510/claude-ddtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use plan-execute, pr-comment and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
longranger2Skillplan-execute
Use when the user says "/plan-execute", "plan execute", "implement plan", or "execute plan" and provides a finalized plan file path to carry out. Claude orchestrates, Codex writes code, Claude reviews, and Codex fixes issues until the quality bar is met.
Also in 3 projects that use this
BenjaminGSkillpr-comment
This skill should be used when reviewing someone else's pull request and you want drafted review comments posted to GitHub — either gate / gate-wf findings (tier-marked) or pr-challenge's reviewer questions (unmarked) — each drafted through humanizer and posted as a standalone inline comment at its file:line, after one confirmation. Triggers on "post these as review comments", "comment the gate findings on the PR", "draft and post my review", "leave review comments", after a gate / gate-wf run or a pr-challenge pass on a PR you're reviewing.
Also in 3 projects that use this
MicrosoftSkillspec-review
Independent, multi-model review of a design or spec **before** any code is written, for the microsoft/winappcli repo. Activate when a contributor asks to "review this spec", "review my design", "review this design doc", "validate this approach", "should we build this", "spec review", "design review", or "feature review". Fans out parallel sub-agents — each doing its OWN research against the real codebase and ecosystem rather than trusting the spec — covering necessity & scope, approach & alternatives, feasibility vs reality, risks & unknowns, DX & user impact, and a different-model-family cross-check. Emits a decision-oriented recommendation (proceed / proceed-with-changes / reconsider) to stdout. This is the PRE-CODE companion to the pr-review skill (which reviews code already written); use spec-review at the design/spec stage, not on an implemented diff. Does NOT write code or edit the spec.
Also in 3 projects that use this
AnthropicSkilloffice-hours
Set up and run Claude Code office hours, including the calendar event when the champion's own calendar connector allows it. Use when a champion wants a regular time for teammates to bring problems.
Also in 3 projects that use this
AWSSkillretro
Conduct a retrospective on a coding session.
Also in 5 projects that use this
BlockSkillplan
Draft a TDD, PRD, or lightweight plan in the conversation without committing it.
Also in 5 projects that use this
Other versions43 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 43
- ahmadrosid/nakama★ 786same name
- igerber/diff-diff★ 413same name
- Mathews-Tom/armory★ 340same name
- sd0xdev/sd0x-dev-flow★ 192same name
- sd0xdev/sd0x-harness★ 192same name
- YougLin-dev/Aha-Loop★ 181same name
- longranger2/claude-gpt-workflow★ 76same name
- ConnorGriffin/skills★ 21same name
- liewcf/agent-skills★ 16same name
- kopp0510/claude-dd★ 12same name
33 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 35 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 35
Never interview the user. The only question is one batched product-decision pause.
- Very specific: line 58
Follow refs/protocol-review.md end to end — Steps 1–3 (resolve and select → certify → fix, record, stamp, report).
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 35 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
plan-review
Usage
Invoke: /plan-review [prd-path] — a manual step the user can run at any time.
- Natural language: "certify the PRD", "review the PRD", "run the contract certifier", "check the PRD before plan-em"
- Context: a path to an existing PRD
.mdfile, or a run right afterplan-pmorplan-emsaved one - plan-pm and plan-em run it at the end of their run when their auto-review switch is on, and plan-em runs it before engineering when the PRD has no stamp.
The skill picks the product check (checks 1, 2, 3, 6) or the eng check (checks 2, 4, 5, 6, 7) by itself. refs/certification.md owns the checks, the severity rubric and the findings-table schema. Scripts handle PRDs written before v5.4.
Posture
A certifier, not an adversarial reviewer: run the selected check's subset and nothing else — no check without a consumer. Never interview the user. The only question is one batched product-decision pause.
Inputs
| Name | Format | Required | Source |
| PRD file path | .md file matching features/prd-*/prd-*.md | Yes (asked if missing) | User message, or the skill that ran it |
devkit/ files | AHA.md, OPEN-QUESTIONS.md, PLATFORMS.md | No | Each is used when present and skipped silently when absent. No devkit/ at all ⇒ setup runs by itself first (/msg --init, then this command — ../shared/refs/setup-first.md) |
Outputs
| Name | Destination |
| Findings ledger | <prd-dir>/reports/review-prd-[n]-[slug].md, written by script-ledger.py once, after the fixes |
| Revised PRD | RESOLVED_PATH — every Critical/Major fix, and the normalised Open questions table |
| Certification stamp | PRD frontmatter, via script-prd-stamp.sh --certify — written only when no Critical stays open |
| Self-healing learnings | devkit/AHA.md, one [tune:<category>] entry per auto-fixed Critical/Major |
| Result block | Inline, at the end of the run (refs/protocol-review.md Step 3) |
The stamp is the gate, the report is the evidence. script-cert-status.sh and plan-em read the stamp and the open Criticals in the report.
Step-by-step protocol
Follow refs/protocol-review.md end to end — Steps 1–3 (resolve and select → certify → fix, record, stamp, report).
Closing message: end every run with the closing message per ../shared/refs/closing-message.md, after the result block. When plan-em runs this skill inline, plan-em's digest carries the result and plan-em closes the run.
Harness incidents: log unexpected script failures, tool errors, retries and missed writes to devkit/DOCTOR.md per ../shared/refs/doctor-logging.md.
References
refs/protocol-review.md— the three-step protocolrefs/certification.md— the seven checks, consumers, severity rubric, findings-table schema, AHA categories.claude/scripts/—script-cert-preflight.sh(path + check type),script-cert-mech.py(checks 4, 5, 6 structure),script-ledger.py(the ledger),script-prd-stamp.sh --certify(the stamp),script-aha.sh·script-openq.sh(devkit writers)
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

