plan-review-invoke

name	plan-review-invoke
description	Invoke the plan-reviewer agent using the canonical reference prompt from seed/plan-reviewer-design.md. Use when reviewing a plan in a fresh Claude Code session (after the plan was created in a prior session) and you want adversarial review (checklist + Elegance Gate + handoff plan) without manually copy-pasting the reference prompt. Accepts the plan path as an argument. NOT for: same-session plan reviews (just invoke the agent directly with the plan in context), reviewing implementations that already shipped (use /multi-review or /session-critique), or spec audits (the agent has a separate Spec Audit mode invoked differently).
auto-activate	false

plan-review-invoke

Closes the loop between seed/plan-reviewer-design.md (canonical reference prompt) and the plan-reviewer agent (behavior definition). The reference prompt contains three sections — <investigate_before_answering>, <handoff_requirements>, and <final_output> — that are operative ONLY when the prompt is actually run. The agent's own system prompt has the checklist and Elegance Gate baked in but does NOT enforce the handoff-plan output format on its own.

This skill bridges the gap: it reads the design doc at invocation time, extracts the prompt, and runs it.

When to fire

User types /plan-review-invoke <path-to-plan> in a fresh session, with phrasings such as:

• /plan-review-invoke docs/plans/2026-05-29-new-feature.md
• /plan-review-invoke ~/.claude/plans/refactor-auth.md
• /plan-review-invoke (no path — ask which plan)

Skip if:

• Same-session review — the planning session already has full context; invoke the agent directly via the Agent tool with subagent_type: plan-reviewer and a focused prompt.
• The "plan" is actually an implementation diff — use /multi-review or /session-critique instead.
• The target is a spec document (file in specs/, docs/specs/, docs/contracts/) — the agent has a Spec Audit mode invoked differently; this skill is for plan reviews.

Process

1. Resolve the plan path. If the user supplied a path as an argument, verify the file exists with Read. If no path was supplied, ask: "Which plan should I review? Paste the path." Confirm before proceeding.

2. Extract the reference prompt. Read seed/plan-reviewer-design.md. Locate the prompt with this anchor-based algorithm (no hardcoded line numbers — the skill must survive doc edits):

   • Find the line that starts with ## The Prompt (H2 heading).
   • From that line, find the FIRST triple-backtick code fence (```) that opens — this is the start-of-prompt.
   • Find the matching closing triple-backtick code fence — this is the end-of-prompt.
   • The prompt body is everything between (exclusive of) those two fences.
   • If the algorithm fails to find these anchors, ABORT with a clear error and ask the user to verify seed/plan-reviewer-design.md still follows the documented structure (H2 "The Prompt" → fenced code block).

3. Invoke the agent. Spawn the plan-reviewer agent via Agent(subagent_type: "plan-reviewer", ...). The agent's prompt should be:

   <plan_to_review>
   {{full contents of the plan file at the user-supplied path}}
   </plan_to_review>
   
   Note: this plan was created in a prior Claude Code session, not "this session"
   as the reference prompt below phrases it. Treat the `<plan_to_review>` block
   above as the authoritative plan content. Where the reference prompt says
   "the plan I just created in this session," substitute "the plan in the
   <plan_to_review> block."
   
   {{the extracted reference prompt body}}
   

   The override note above resolves the phrasing mismatch — the reference prompt was originally written for same-session use; this skill repurposes it for cross-session invocation, so the wrapper + override note make the substitution explicit to the agent.

4. Surface the verdict. The agent returns APPROVE / APPROVE WITH CHANGES / REJECT with findings and (per the <final_output> block) a handoff-ready plan via /writing-plans. Present the verdict + key findings to the user. Do NOT auto-apply any plan changes — the user decides whether to revise.

Why the skill (not just docs)

Before this skill existed, the workflow was: human reads workflow.md → opens seed/plan-reviewer-design.md → copies prompt → pastes into fresh session → main Claude invokes agent. Four manual steps, each with drift risk. The skill collapses it to one command and guarantees the doc's prompt is the source of truth (read at invocation time, not snapshotted).

Skip / NOT for

• Same-session reviews. The planning session already has the plan and surrounding context loaded. Spawn the agent directly with a focused prompt instead — the reference prompt's <investigate_before_answering> block is most valuable when the agent starts cold.
• Implementation review. This skill reviews PLANS (before implementation). Use /multi-review or /session-critique for code/diff review.
• Spec audits. The agent has a Spec Audit Mode (see seed/.claude/agents/plan-reviewer.md) invoked with different scaffolding.

See also

• seed/.claude/agents/plan-reviewer.md — agent behavior definition (system prompt, checklist, Elegance Gate, modes)
• seed/plan-reviewer-design.md — canonical reference prompt + design rationale
• seed/.claude/rules/workflow.md Stage 3 — where this skill plugs into the 6-stage session workflow