name plan-review description Systematic project plan review toolkit. Evaluate architecture decisions, building block specifications, sprint plans, cost estimates, risk assessments, and implementation feasibility for comprehensive project plan validation. allowed-tools ["Read","Write","Edit","Bash"]
Project Plan Review and Validation
Overview
Plan review is a systematic process for evaluating project plans and specifications. Assess architecture decisions, building blocks, sprint plans, cost estimates, risk assessments, and implementation roadmaps. Apply this skill to validate project plans before implementation begins.
When to Use This Skill
This skill should be used when:
Reviewing completed project plans and specifications
Validating architecture decisions and technology choices
Assessing building block specifications for completeness
Reviewing sprint plans and user stories for INVEST criteria
Validating cost estimates and ROI projections
Evaluating risk assessments and mitigation strategies
Providing constructive feedback on implementation roadmaps
Visual Enhancement with Project Diagrams
When creating review documents, consider adding diagrams to enhance communication.
Use the project-diagrams skill to generate:
Architecture review diagrams highlighting concerns
Dependency analysis visualizations
Sprint timeline charts
Risk heat maps
Cost breakdown charts
python .claude/skills/project-diagrams/scripts/generate_schematic.py "diagram description" -o diagrams/output.png
Plan Review Workflow
Conduct plan review systematically through the following stages.
Stage 1: Initial Assessment
Begin with a high-level evaluation to determine the plan's scope, completeness, and overall quality.
Key Questions:
What is the project's core objective and value proposition?
Are all major deliverables and milestones identified?
Is the scope realistic for the proposed timeline and resources?
Are there any immediate major gaps or inconsistencies?
Output: Brief summary (2-3 sentences) capturing the plan's essence and initial impression.
Stage 2: Architecture Review
Evaluate the system architecture and technology decisions.
Technology Stack Assessment
Appropriateness: Is the stack suitable for the project's requirements?Maturity: Are chosen technologies production-ready and well-supported?Team Skills: Does the team have expertise with the chosen stack?Scalability: Can the architecture handle projected growth?Cost: Are there hidden costs or vendor lock-in risks?
Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)
Are major decisions documented with context and rationale?
Are alternatives considered and trade-offs discussed?
Are decisions traceable to requirements?
Component Design
Is the system properly decomposed into logical components?
Are component boundaries clear and responsibilities well-defined?
Are interfaces between components specified?
Are there circular dependencies or tight coupling concerns?
Stage 3: Building Block Specification Review
Evaluate each building block for completeness and buildability.
For each building block, verify:
Specification Completeness
Buildability Assessment
Can Claude Code build this block independently?
Are all prerequisites and dependencies available?
Is the scope small enough for incremental delivery?
Are acceptance criteria testable?
Interface Contracts
Are API endpoints RESTful with proper HTTP methods?
Are request/response schemas defined?
Are error responses specified?
Are events and messages well-documented?
Stage 4: Sprint Plan Review
Evaluate sprint plans for feasibility and INVEST criteria.
Sprint Structure
Goals: Are sprint goals clear, measurable, and achievable?Duration: Is the sprint duration realistic (typically 1-2 weeks)?Scope: Is the sprint scope appropriate for the team capacity?Dependencies: Are inter-sprint dependencies identified?
User Stories Assessment (INVEST Criteria)
Criterion Question Independent Can this story be delivered without other stories? Negotiable Is the scope flexible based on feedback? Valuable Does it deliver value to users or stakeholders? Estimable Can effort be reasonably estimated? Small Can it be completed within a sprint? Testable Are acceptance criteria clear and testable?
Story Quality Checklist
Stage 5: Cost Analysis Review
Evaluate cost estimates and financial projections.
Service Cost Verification
Are estimates based on current pricing (not outdated)?
Are pricing sources documented?
Are usage assumptions realistic?
Are low/mid/high scenarios provided?
Cost Categories to Verify
ROI Assessment
Are revenue projections realistic and justified?
Is the payback period calculated correctly?
Are growth assumptions documented?
Are comparable market data referenced?
Stage 6: Risk Assessment Review
Evaluate risk identification and mitigation strategies.
Risk Register Completeness
Risk Coverage Assessment
Verify these common risk categories are addressed:
Category Example Risks Technical Integration failures, scalability issues, technical debt Security Data breaches, authentication vulnerabilities Resource Key person dependency, skill gaps, turnover External Third-party API changes, regulatory changes Business Market changes, competitor actions, budget cuts Timeline Scope creep, dependency delays, underestimation
Mitigation Quality
Are mitigations actionable and specific?
Are contingency plans realistic?
Is residual risk acceptable?
Stage 7: Timeline and Milestone Review
Evaluate the implementation timeline.
Timeline Realism
Are duration estimates realistic based on complexity?
Is there adequate buffer for uncertainties (20-30%)?
Are holidays and team availability considered?
Are external dependencies factored in?
Critical Path Analysis
Is the critical path identified?
Are bottlenecks recognized?
Are parallel workstreams maximized?
Are milestone dependencies clear?
Milestone Quality
Structuring Plan Review Reports
Organize feedback in a hierarchical structure.
Summary Statement
Provide a concise overall assessment (1-2 paragraphs):
Brief synopsis of the project plan
Overall recommendation (approve, minor revisions, major revisions, significant rework)
Key strengths (2-3 bullet points)
Key concerns (2-3 bullet points)
Bottom-line assessment of implementation readiness
Critical Issues
List issues that must be resolved before implementation:
Missing critical specifications
Unrealistic estimates or timelines
Major architectural flaws
Unaddressed high-impact risks
Budget insufficiencies
For each critical issue:
Clearly state the issue
Explain why it's critical
Suggest specific resolution
Indicate blocking nature
Major Recommendations
List important issues that should be addressed:
Specification gaps
Unclear interfaces
Missing test criteria
Questionable technology choices
Incomplete risk coverage
Minor Suggestions
List improvements for plan quality:
Documentation clarifications
Diagram additions
Minor specification enhancements
Alternative approaches to consider
Questions for Clarification
List specific questions needing answers:
Unclear requirements
Ambiguous decisions
Missing context
Assumption verification
Review Checklist by Plan Component
Project Specification Review
Technical Specification Review
Building Blocks Review
Sprint Plan Review
Cost Analysis Review
Risk Assessment Review
Tone and Approach
Maintain a constructive, professional tone throughout.
Best Practices:
Be constructive: Frame concerns as opportunities for improvementBe specific: Reference specific sections, blocks, or estimatesBe balanced: Acknowledge strengths alongside concernsBe actionable: Provide concrete suggestionsBe thorough: Cover all plan components systematically
Avoid:
Vague criticism without specifics
Dismissing plans without justification
Imposing personal preferences over best practices
Scope creep in recommendations
Perfectionism that delays implementation
Final Checklist
Before finalizing the review, verify:
