Install
$ agentstack add skill-85danf-agent-skills-review-plan ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Review Plan Against Design
Orchestrate verification that plan documents are correctly derived from and consistent with their source design documents.
Overview
Dispatch reviewer subagents to compare (design, plan) pairs. Each reviewer independently verifies one plan against one design. This file handles file classification, mapping, dispatching, and result aggregation only. All review logic lives in agents/design-reviewer.md.
Step 1: Classify Input Files
Determine which @ files are design docs and which are plan docs.
Plans: filenames containing "plan" Designs: filenames containing "design", "architecture", "brainstorm", "spec", "requirements"
If ambiguous, ask the user.
Step 2: Determine Mapping
digraph mapping {
"Count designs and plans" [shape=box];
"1 design + 1 plan?" [shape=diamond];
"1 design + N plans?" [shape=diamond];
"Proceed: 1 pair" [shape=box];
"Auto-map all plans to single design" [shape=box];
"Ask user for mapping" [shape=box];
"Count designs and plans" -> "1 design + 1 plan?";
"1 design + 1 plan?" -> "Proceed: 1 pair" [label="yes"];
"1 design + 1 plan?" -> "1 design + N plans?" [label="no"];
"1 design + N plans?" -> "Auto-map all plans to single design" [label="yes"];
"1 design + N plans?" -> "Ask user for mapping" [label="no"];
}
N designs + M plans — ask the user:
> I found multiple design docs and plan docs. Please tell me which design verifies which plan(s): > > Design docs: {list} > Plan docs: {list} > > Example mapping: "design-auth -> plan-auth, design-api -> plan-api + plan-integration"
Step 3: Spawn Reviewer Subagents
For each (design, plan) pair, read agents/design-reviewer.md and spawn a subagent.
Single pair: Spawn one subagent inline (no background). Multiple pairs: Spawn ALL subagents in a single message with run_in_background: true.
Subagent invocation:
Task tool parameters:
subagent_type: "general-purpose"
model: "opus"
run_in_background: true (only for multiple pairs)
description: "Review '{plan_filename}' against '{design_filename}'"
prompt: |
{paste full content of agents/design-reviewer.md}
## Assignment
### Design Document
Read this file: {design_file_path}
### Plan Document
Read this file: {plan_file_path}
Perform the full review as specified in your instructions above.
Step 4: Aggregate Results
After all subagents return, compile into this format:
# Design-Plan Review Summary
## Overall Assessment: [Aligned / Aligned with Fixes / Misaligned]
## Critical Issues (X found)
- [{plan_filename}]: {issue description} [{design_doc}:{section} -> {plan_doc}:{section}]
## Important Issues (X found)
- [{plan_filename}]: {issue description} [{design_doc}:{section} -> {plan_doc}:{section}]
## Minor Issues (X found)
- [{plan_filename}]: {issue description}
## Strengths
- What is well-aligned across the documents
## Summary of Issues
| Symbol | Severity | Plan Doc Location | Description | Recommendation |
| ------ | --------- | -------------------- | -------------------------------- | -------------- |
| D1-I1 | Critical | plan-core.md # L:124 | (shortened description of issue) | |
| D1-I2 | Important | plan-core.md # L:511 | (shortened description of issue) | |
| D2-I3 | Minor | plan-data.md # L:33 | (shortened description of issue) | |
## Recommended Actions
1. Fix critical issues first
2. Address important issues
3. Consider minor improvements
Determination logic:
- Aligned: Zero critical issues, zero or few important issues
- Aligned with Fixes: Zero critical but important issues exist, OR 1-2 straightforward critical issues
- Misaligned: Multiple critical issues or fundamental design-plan disconnect
If only one reviewer was spawned, use same format without per-reviewer prefixes.
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: 85danf
- Source: 85danf/agent-skills
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.