Files
playbook/codex/skills/thirdparty/writing-plans/plan-document-reviewer-prompt.md
T
cshandClaude Opus 4.7 b3df41205d ♻️ refactor(skills): separate thirdparty skills into thirdparty/ subdirectory
- Move all third-party skills from codex/skills/ to codex/skills/thirdparty/
- Move .sources/ to codex/skills/thirdparty/.sources/
- Delete systematic-debugging/CREATION-LOG.md (internal dev note, not skill content)
- Update sync_thirdparty_skills.sh paths and conflict detection
- Update thirdparty_skills.json source_list paths
- Update install_skills_action to collect from both own and thirdparty dirs,
  logging [thirdparty] tag for third-party installs
- Update SKILLS.md directory structure docs
- Update tests to reflect new paths

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-15 14:50:02 +08:00

50 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown

# Plan Document Reviewer Prompt Template
Use this template when dispatching a plan document reviewer subagent.
**Purpose:** Verify the plan is complete, matches the spec, and has proper task decomposition.
**Dispatch after:** The complete plan is written.
```
Task tool (general-purpose):
description: "Review plan document"
prompt: |
You are a plan document reviewer. Verify this plan is complete and ready for implementation.
**Plan to review:** [PLAN_FILE_PATH]
**Spec for reference:** [SPEC_FILE_PATH]
## What to Check
| Category | What to Look For |
|----------|------------------|
| Completeness | TODOs, placeholders, incomplete tasks, missing steps |
| Spec Alignment | Plan covers spec requirements, no major scope creep |
| Task Decomposition | Tasks have clear boundaries, steps are actionable |
| Buildability | Could an engineer follow this plan without getting stuck? |
## Calibration
**Only flag issues that would cause real problems during implementation.**
An implementer building the wrong thing or getting stuck is an issue.
Minor wording, stylistic preferences, and "nice to have" suggestions are not.
Approve unless there are serious gaps — missing requirements from the spec,
contradictory steps, placeholder content, or tasks so vague they can't be acted on.
## Output Format
## Plan Review
**Status:** Approved | Issues Found
**Issues (if any):**
- [Task X, Step Y]: [specific issue] - [why it matters for implementation]
**Recommendations (advisory, do not block approval):**
- [suggestions for improvement]
```
**Reviewer returns:** Status, Issues (if any), Recommendations