Validate plan

Validate Plan

You are tasked with validating that an implementation plan was correctly executed, verifying all success criteria and identifying any deviations or issues.

Initial Setup

When invoked:

1. Determine context - Are you in an existing conversation or starting fresh?

   • If existing: Review what was implemented in this session
   • If fresh: Need to discover what was done through git and codebase analysis

2. Locate the plan:

   • If plan path provided, use it
   • Otherwise, search recent commits for plan references or ask user

3. Gather implementation evidence:

   # Check recent commits
   git log --oneline -n 20
   git diff HEAD~N..HEAD  # Where N covers implementation commits
   
   # Run project-specific verification commands
   # The plan's "Automated Verification" section specifies what to run
   # Common examples:
   # - Python: uv run pytest tests/ -v
   # - Node: npm test
   # - Make: make check test
   # - Rust: cargo test
   # - Go: go test ./...
   

Validation Process

Step 1: Context Discovery

If starting fresh or need more context:

1. Read the implementation plan completely

2. Identify what should have changed:

   • List all files that should be modified
   • Note all success criteria (automated and manual)
   • Identify key functionality to verify

3. Spawn parallel research tasks to discover implementation:

   Task 1 - Verify code changes:
   Find all modified files related to [feature].
   Compare actual changes to plan specifications.
   Return: File-by-file comparison of planned vs actual
   
   Task 2 - Verify test coverage:
   Check if tests were added/modified as specified.
   Run test commands and capture results.
   Return: Test status and any missing coverage
   

Step 2: Systematic Validation

For each phase in the plan:

1. Check completion status:

   • Look for checkmarks in the plan (- [x])
   • Verify the actual code matches claimed completion

2. Run automated verification:

   • Execute each command from the plan's "Automated Verification" section
   • Document pass/fail status with the actual command that was run
   • If failures, investigate root cause

3. Assess manual criteria:

   • List what needs manual testing
   • Provide clear steps for user verification

4. Think deeply about edge cases:

   • Were error conditions handled?
   • Are there missing validations?
   • Could the implementation break existing functionality?

Step 3: Generate Validation Report

Create comprehensive validation summary:

## Validation Report: [Plan Name]

### Implementation Status
✓ Phase 1: [Name] - Fully implemented
✓ Phase 2: [Name] - Fully implemented
⚠️ Phase 3: [Name] - Partially implemented (see issues)

### Automated Verification Results
✓ Build passes: `[command from plan's automated verification]`
✓ Tests pass: `[command from plan's automated verification]`
✗ Linting issues: `[command from plan's automated verification]` (3 warnings)

### Code Review Findings

#### Matches Plan:
- Database migration correctly adds [table]
- API endpoints implement specified methods
- Error handling follows plan

#### Deviations from Plan:
- Used different variable names in [file:line]
- Added extra validation in [file:line] (improvement)

#### Potential Issues:
- Missing index on foreign key could impact performance
- No rollback handling in migration

### Manual Testing Required:
1. UI functionality:
   - [ ] Verify [feature] appears correctly
   - [ ] Test error states with invalid input

2. Integration:
   - [ ] Confirm works with existing [component]
   - [ ] Check performance with large datasets

### Recommendations:
- Address linting warnings before merge
- Consider adding integration test for [scenario]
- Document new API endpoints

Step 4: Update Work-Item State

Based on validation results:

If validation fails (automated checks fail, critical issues found):

tracker set-state <id> validation-failed in-progress

If validation passes (all automated checks pass, ready for PR):

• Keep in-progress state (it will be transitioned to pr-submitted after PR creation)
• Validation passing doesn't mean implementation is done - it means it's ready for code review via PR

Working with Existing Context

If you were part of the implementation:

• Review the conversation history
• Check your todo list for what was completed
• Focus validation on work done in this session
• Be honest about any shortcuts or incomplete items

Important Guidelines

1. Be thorough but practical - Focus on what matters
2. Run all automated checks - Don't skip verification commands
3. Document everything - Both successes and issues
4. Think critically - Question if the implementation truly solves the problem
5. Consider maintenance - Will this be maintainable long-term?

Validation Checklist

Always verify:

• All phases marked complete are actually done
• Automated tests pass
• Code follows existing patterns
• No regressions introduced
• Error handling is robust
• Documentation updated if needed
• Manual test steps are clear

Relationship to Other Commands

Recommended workflow:

1. /implement-plan - Execute the implementation
2. /validate-plan - Verify implementation correctness (quality gate)
3. Fix any issues found during validation
4. /commit - Create atomic commits for changes (only after validation passes)
5. /describe-pr - Generate PR description

Validation works best on uncommitted changes, acting as a quality gate before creating commits. This ensures a cleaner git history without "fix validation issues" commits. Use git diff to analyze what was implemented.

Remember: Good validation catches issues before they reach production. Be constructive but thorough in identifying gaps or improvements.