| name | document-review |
| description | Review requirements or plan documents using parallel persona agents that surface role-specific issues. Use when a requirements document or plan document exists and the user wants to improve it. |
| argument-hint | [mode:headless] [path/to/document.md] |
Document Review
Review requirements or plan documents through multi-persona analysis. Dispatches specialized reviewer agents in parallel, auto-fixes quality issues, and presents strategic questions for user decision.
Phase 0: Detect Mode
Check the skill arguments for mode:headless. Arguments may contain a document path, mode:headless, or both. Tokens starting with mode: are flags, not file paths -- strip them from the arguments and use the remaining token (if any) as the document path for Phase 1.
If mode:headless is present, set headless mode for the rest of the workflow.
Headless mode changes the interaction model, not the classification boundaries. Document-review still applies the same judgment about what has one clear correct fix vs. what needs user judgment. The only difference is how non-auto findings are delivered:
auto fixes are applied silently (same as interactive)present findings are returned as structured text for the caller to handle -- no question prompts, no interactive approval- Phase 5 returns immediately with "Review complete" (no refine/complete question)
The caller receives findings with their original classifications intact and decides what to do with them.
Callers invoke headless mode by including mode:headless in the skill arguments, e.g.:
skill("systematic:document-review", "mode:headless docs/plans/my-plan.md")
If mode:headless is not present, the skill runs in its default interactive mode with no behavior change.
Phase 1: Get and Analyze Document
If a document path is provided: Read it, then proceed.
If no document is specified (interactive mode): Ask which document to review, or find the most recent in docs/brainstorms/ or docs/plans/ using a file-search/glob tool (e.g., Glob in OpenCode).
If no document is specified (headless mode): Output "Review failed: headless mode requires a document path. Re-invoke with: skill("systematic:document-review", "mode:headless ")" without dispatching agents.
Classify Document Type
After reading, classify the document:
- requirements -- from
docs/brainstorms/, focuses on what to build and why
- plan -- from
docs/plans/, focuses on how to build it with implementation details
Select Conditional Personas
Analyze the document content to determine which conditional personas to activate. Check for these signals:
product-lens -- activate when the document makes challengeable claims about what to build and why, or when the proposed work carries strategic weight beyond the immediate problem. The system's users may be end users, developers, operators, maintainers, or any other audience -- the criteria are domain-agnostic. Check for either leg:
Leg 1 — Premise claims: The document stakes a position on what to build or why that a knowledgeable stakeholder could reasonably challenge -- not merely describing a task or restating known requirements:
- Problem framing where the stated need is non-obvious or debatable, not self-evident from existing context
- Solution selection where alternatives plausibly exist (implicit or explicit)
- Prioritization decisions that explicitly rank what gets built vs deferred
- Goal statements that predict specific user outcomes, not just restate constraints or describe deliverables
Leg 2 — Strategic weight: The proposed work could affect system trajectory, user perception, or competitive positioning, even if the premise is sound:
- Changes that shape how the system is perceived or what it becomes known for
- Complexity or simplicity bets that affect adoption, onboarding, or cognitive load
- Work that opens or closes future directions (path dependencies, architectural commitments)
- Opportunity cost implications -- building this means not building something else
design-lens -- activate when the document contains:
- UI/UX references, frontend components, or visual design language
- User flows, wireframes, screen/page/view mentions
- Interaction descriptions (forms, buttons, navigation, modals)
- References to responsive behavior or accessibility
security-lens -- activate when the document contains:
- Auth/authorization mentions, login flows, session management
- API endpoints exposed to external clients
- Data handling, PII, payments, tokens, credentials, encryption
- Third-party integrations with trust boundary implications
scope-guardian -- activate when the document contains:
- Multiple priority tiers (P0/P1/P2, must-have/should-have/nice-to-have)
- Large requirement count (>8 distinct requirements or implementation units)
- Stretch goals, nice-to-haves, or "future work" sections
- Scope boundary language that seems misaligned with stated goals
- Goals that don't clearly connect to requirements
adversarial -- activate when the document contains:
- More than 5 distinct requirements or implementation units
- Explicit architectural or scope decisions with stated rationale
- High-stakes domains (auth, payments, data migrations, external integrations)
- Proposals of new abstractions, frameworks, or significant architectural patterns
Phase 2: Announce and Dispatch Personas
Announce the Review Team
Tell the user which personas will review and why. For conditional personas, include the justification:
Reviewing with:
- coherence-reviewer (always-on)
- feasibility-reviewer (always-on)
- scope-guardian-reviewer -- plan has 12 requirements across 3 priority levels
- security-lens-reviewer -- plan adds API endpoints with auth flow
Build Agent List
Always include:
systematic:document-review:coherence-reviewersystematic:document-review:feasibility-reviewer
Add activated conditional personas:
systematic:document-review:product-lens-reviewersystematic:document-review:design-lens-reviewersystematic:document-review:security-lens-reviewersystematic:document-review:scope-guardian-reviewersystematic:document-review:adversarial-document-reviewer
Dispatch
Dispatch all agents in parallel using the platform's task/agent tool (e.g., Agent tool in OpenCode, spawn in Codex). Omit the mode parameter so the user's configured permission settings apply. Each agent receives the prompt built from the subagent template included below with these variables filled:
| Variable | Value |
|---|
{persona_file} | Full content of the agent's markdown file |
{schema} | Content of the findings schema included below |
{document_type} | "requirements" or "plan" from Phase 1 classification |
{document_path} | Path to the document |
{document_content} | Full text of the document |
Pass each agent the full document -- do not split into sections.
Error handling: If an agent fails or times out, proceed with findings from agents that completed. Note the failed agent in the Coverage section. Do not block the entire review on a single agent failure.
Dispatch limit: Even at maximum (7 agents), use parallel dispatch. These are document reviewers with bounded scope reading a single document -- parallel is safe and fast.
Phases 3-5: Synthesis, Presentation, and Next Action
After all dispatched agents return, read references/synthesis-and-presentation.md for the synthesis pipeline (validate, gate, dedup, promote, resolve contradictions, route by autofix class), auto-fix application, finding presentation, and next-action menu. Do not load this file before agent dispatch completes.
Included References
Subagent Template
@./references/subagent-template.md
Findings Schema
@./references/findings-schema.json
