원클릭으로
auto-eng-review
Optional engineering go/no-go on a plan. Use when execution safety needs review before implementation.
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
메뉴
Optional engineering go/no-go on a plan. Use when execution safety needs review before implementation.
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
SOC 직업 분류 기준
Implement approved plan slices. Use as the execute-stage entry point.
Bound and de-risk a request into SPEC.md. Use when the objective is clear but scope needs constraining.
Sharpen a vague idea into a bounded objective. Use before framing when scope is undefined.
Build project truth from repo evidence. Use when steering is missing or stale.
Turn an approved spec into ordered slices. Use when framing is accepted and planning begins.
Recover active change and next action from artifacts. Use on fresh session with existing work.
| name | auto-eng-review |
| description | Optional engineering go/no-go on a plan. Use when execution safety needs review before implementation. |
| metadata | {"stage":"plan"} |
Optional engineering-safety review. Validates that a plan is safe to execute before implementation begins.
First action: run node .agent/.automaton/scripts/get-context.mjs from the project root.
Execution safety review. Architecture, data flow, edge cases, test strategy, not product vision. It does not modify the plan or reopen product scope. Identifies risks that could cause failure, stalling, or rework.
A good review names the riskiest slice, the most likely failure mode, and whether the test strategy catches it. A bad review lists generic concerns.
Loading discipline: one PLAN.md read, optional DESIGN.md when canonical_design exists, one risk matrix, one verdict. Read source files when assessing technical risk: slice boundaries, dependency assumptions, and blast radius claims are only verifiable against the actual code.
Before appending the engineering review:
references/quality.md when findings are generic or unactionable.Do NOT proceed unless:
canonical_plan is set and PLAN.md is readable.If the plan is missing or unreadable, set verdict to needs_correction and stop.
Read the canonical PLAN.md. Read DESIGN.md only when canonical_design is set and resolves to a file; otherwise continue without it and note that the plan intentionally has no design artifact.
In engineering terms: what is being built, what systems does it touch, and what is the critical path?
Use this matrix as an internal checklist. In chat, summarize only the verdict-driving dimensions unless the user asks for the full matrix. Apply standards from references/prime-directives.md while evaluating.
Read references/risk-examples.md for sample matrix scoring.
| Dimension | Rating (0–10) | What a 10 looks like |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture fit | Clean integration, no hacks, follows existing patterns | |
| Data flow clarity | Every input, transform, and output is traceable | |
| Edge case coverage | Failure modes are enumerated and handled | |
| Test strategy | Tests are specified before code, not after | |
| Rollback safety | Can revert without data loss or downtime | |
| Dependency risk | No new critical dependencies; existing ones are stable |
A score of 3 or lower in any dimension is a blocking concern: a score that low means you can already name the failure mode, and naming it is the review's job. Surface it explicitly. Read references/engineering-sections.md only when the plan carries non-trivial engineering risk.
Use exactly one of the three approved values. Read references/implementation-alternatives.md only when PLAN.md lacks an approach rationale, the user asks for alternatives, or the verdict depends on comparing safer execution paths.
Use strict vocabulary. No synonyms.
| Verdict | Meaning | Next Action |
|---|---|---|
approved | Implementation is safe to proceed. | auto-execute |
approved_with_risks | Implementation is safe but carries known risks. Document them. | auto-execute |
needs_correction | Plan is flawed or unsafe. Return to planning. | auto-plan |
Optional. When a second model is reachable from this session and the plan carries non-trivial risk, read references/outside-voice.md after rendering the verdict: a round-capped cross-model loop that arbiters findings with logged reasons, surfaces tension to the user, and never auto-applies anything.
Add a ## Review: Engineering section to PLAN.md using the exact template in references/review-template.md.
Run node .agent/.automaton/scripts/sync-status.mjs --engineering-review "<verdict>" from the project root.
State the next skill based on the verdict.
PLAN.md with appended ## Review: Engineering section.agent/.automaton/state/current.json updated through sync-status.mjs with engineering_review; stage is unchanged by this skillapproved/approved_with_risks → Next: auto-execute; needs_correction → Next: auto-plan.canonical_design is null, absent, or intentionally skipped by the plan.