| name | plan-validate |
| description | Validate implementation plans against intent using reverse-questioning, assumption stress-testing, and gap analysis |
| layer | hub |
| category | workflow |
| triggers | ["/plan-validate","validate this plan","stress test the plan","check the plan","review the plan"] |
| inputs | [{"plan":"The implementation plan to validate (from plan skill or user-provided)"},{"originalIntent":"The original goal or request that spawned the plan (optional but recommended)"}] |
| outputs | [{"validationReport":"Structured report with findings, gaps, and recommendations"},{"reverseQuestions":"Questions that expose hidden assumptions or misalignments"},{"strengthScore":"Qualitative assessment of plan readiness (Red/Yellow/Green)"}] |
| linksTo | ["plan","research","scout"] |
| linkedFrom | ["plan","cook","team","ship"] |
| preferredNextSkills | ["plan","kanban","scout"] |
| fallbackSkills | ["brainstorm","research"] |
| riskLevel | low |
| memoryReadPolicy | selective |
| memoryWritePolicy | selective |
| sideEffects | ["Produces validation report","May flag plan for revision"] |
Plan-Validate Skill
Purpose
Serve as the adversarial reviewer of implementation plans. This skill's job is to find what is wrong, missing, or fragile in a plan BEFORE execution begins. It uses reverse-questioning, assumption stress-testing, and gap analysis to surface problems that are cheap to fix on paper and expensive to fix in code.
Think of this as a pre-mortem: imagine the plan has already failed, then work backward to find out why.
Workflow
Pass 1: Intent Alignment Check
- Restate the original intent in one sentence. If the original intent is not available, infer it from the plan's objective.
- Compare plan scope to intent -- Does the plan actually deliver what was asked for? Common misalignments:
- Plan is broader than intent (scope creep baked in)
- Plan is narrower than intent (missing features)
- Plan solves an adjacent problem (misunderstood requirement)
- Generate 3-5 reverse questions -- Questions phrased as "If we complete this plan exactly as written, will we have [X]?" where X tests different facets of the original intent.
Pass 2: Assumption Stress Test
- Extract every assumption -- Both explicitly stated and implicit ones buried in the plan.
- For each assumption, apply the inversion test: "What happens if the opposite is true?"
- If the answer is "the plan still works" -- the assumption is non-critical.
- If the answer is "the plan breaks" -- the assumption is load-bearing and must be verified before execution.
- Flag unverified load-bearing assumptions as blockers.
Pass 3: Completeness Audit
- Check for missing phases -- Is there a gap between phases where work would need to happen but is not accounted for?
- Check for missing tasks within phases -- Are there implied subtasks not listed?
- Check for missing cross-cutting concerns:
- Error handling / failure modes
- Testing strategy
- Rollback plan
- Data migration (if applicable)
- Security implications
- Performance implications
- Accessibility (if UI work)
- Documentation updates
- Check dependency chain -- Are there circular dependencies? Missing dependencies? Implicit ordering that is not stated?
Pass 4: Feasibility Check
