review-dev-plan

name	review-dev-plan
description	Runs six parallel Task subagents to critique a development plan (feedback only). Use when checking whether a plan is sound before implementation; no code or plan edits unless the user asks afterward.
disable-model-invocation	false

Review Dev Plan (/review-dev-plan)

Config

SUBAGENT_MODEL=composer-2.5

Every Task subagent: model = slug above (must be valid for your Cursor build; edit the value only).

Feedback only — do not change code, rules, or the plan unless the user asks afterward. Reply with a short synthesis in chat.

Which plan?

Resolve in order:

1. Path in the user message.
2. Focused plan file in the editor.
3. Infer documentation/jobs/**/DEVELOPMENT_PLAN.md (state assumption).
4. Legacy IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md or plan.md under documentation/jobs/ (state assumption).
5. If still ambiguous, one question; no subagents until the plan is known or pasted.

Run: six parallel Task agents (one turn)

Self-contained prompts each; they do not see this chat. Each: orient (e.g. ARCHITECTURE.md, documentation/DOC_INDEX.md, documentation/DOC_APP_VISION.md, relevant .cursor/rules/, paths/READMEs the plan touches) → read the plan (path or pasted text) → structured feedback (gaps, risks, sequencing, validation, boundaries, checklist quality).

The Industry precedent agent must read .agents/skills/pattern-review/references/rubric.md and alert-template.md (same as pattern-review).

Perspectives (6):

#	Role
2	You pick — distinct lenses (e.g. delivery, tests, security/ops, UX/API); not rebel, scale/mod, or industry precedent.
1	Rebel (fixed) — when a clean-slate / different approach is better; say so plainly + high-level alternative. No incremental polish only.
1	Scalability / modularity (fixed) — scale (load, cost, ops, data growth, failure modes, ceilings) and evolution (coupling, layers, ports, swappable deps, extension points, lock-in, future-you debt).
1	Industry precedent (fixed) — compare the plan to common product/engineering practice using .agents/skills/pattern-review/references/rubric.md: pick relevant aspects for this plan, name precedents, flag material divergence and missing § Pattern & precedent content.

Short description per Task (e.g. “— rebel”, “— scale/mod”, “— industry precedent”).

After

Synthesize: agreements, must-fix vs nice-to-have, items ≥2 agents flagged. Do not rewrite the plan unless asked. Fold in user constraints (scope, timebox, risks) if given.

Allowed plan edits without full rewrite: Update only the Plan review row in Summary and rows in Decisions made when the user accepts the critique (or record waiver in Decisions made). Do not edit phase steps, Pattern & precedent body, or other sections unless the user explicitly asks.

Update the plan’s Plan review row to Done <date> when the user accepts the critique (or record waiver in Decisions made).

Next: .agents/skills/implement/SKILL.md when Plan review is Done and gates pass — or back to plan if the plan must change materially.

Boundaries

Skill	Role
review-dev-plan	Qualitative multi-lens plan critique (includes industry precedent)
validate	Parallel repo rule subagents (.cursor/rules/) — JSON findings

For Complexity M/L or rule-heavy plans, run both when appropriate.

Related

• validate — rule-shaped plan-review vs impl-review
• pattern-review — industry precedent procedure and rubric SSOT
• plan — creates DEVELOPMENT_PLAN.md
• feature — product/requirements process
• implement — executes the plan