| name | plan-review |
| description | Review a dated plan under docs/specs/ for missing steps, wrong assumptions, or guideline violations before implementation begins. |
Review the latest dated plan under docs/specs/ (or the plan file specified in $ARGUMENTS) for potential problems before implementation begins.
Plan Discovery
With $ARGUMENTS: resolve against docs/specs/ — look for docs/specs/<YY_MM_DD_HH>_<name>/plan.md using the full dated spec identifier.
Without $ARGUMENTS:
- List all
*/plan.md files under docs/specs/
- Extract the
YY_MM_DD_HH prefix from each folder
- Use the file with the latest timestamp prefix
Rules
- Read the plan file first, then read relevant project rules (
CLAUDE.md and any project rules directory) that apply to the plan's scope
- Spawn a sub-agent to perform the review independently (it should re-read the plan and rules itself)
- The sub-agent must NOT modify any files — review only
- Present all concerns at once, then ask the user to approve all or indicate which to skip
- Keep each point short: state the problem, why it matters, and a concise fix — no nitpicking on style or naming
- Format proposed fixes as
diff blocks (lines removed prefixed with -, lines added prefixed with +) alongside the plain-text explanation
- Focus on: missing steps, wrong assumptions, inconsistency with project guidelines, architectural mismatches, and anything likely to cause rework during implementation
- If no real concerns are found, say so briefly and stop
Sub-agent prompt template:
Review the plan at [plan path]. Read it in full, then read the relevant project rules for the plan's scope (check CLAUDE.md and any project rules directory for domain-specific guidance). Identify concerns — missing steps, wrong assumptions, guideline violations, architectural mismatches — that would cause problems during implementation. Return a numbered list of concerns, each with: problem, why it matters, proposed fix. For each fix, include a diff block showing the before/after lines (lines removed prefixed with -, lines added with +). Skip style/naming nitpicks. If there are no real concerns, say so.
