Plan review

Skill dr-code/tessera/skills/plan-review

Send execution plans to GPT for structured review via Codex CLI. Use when you have a written plan and want independent validation before implementation.From its SKILL.md

Install

npx -y skills add dr-code/tessera --skill plan-review

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

1 stars1 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

SKILL.md

3.0 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

/plan-review — Independent Plan Review via Codex

Usage

/plan-review path/to/plan.md /plan-review — reads plan from current conversation context or asks user to provide it

Description

Send an implementation plan to GPT via Codex CLI for structured review before implementation begins. Claude synthesizes GPT's feedback, agrees or disagrees with each point, and issues a go/no-go verdict.

Instructions

Phase 0: Load Plan + Tessera Context

If tessera MCP is configured in this session:

1. graph_continue (mandatory first call)
2. graph_action_summary — surface locked decisions that may constrain the plan
3. graph_retrieve with the plan's key feature terms — find relevant existing code

If a file path was provided: read the plan file
If no path: ask the user to paste the plan or specify where it is
Include the retrieved context and any locked decisions in the GPT review prompt so it can flag contradictions with existing patterns

Phase 1: Send to GPT

Construct the review prompt with the full plan text and any codebase context:

codex exec "You are reviewing an implementation plan before execution begins. Plan: <PLAN_TEXT>. Codebase context: <CONTEXT>. Review for: (1) architecture violations or inconsistency with existing patterns, (2) missing edge cases or error handling, (3) wrong ordering of steps or missing dependencies between steps, (4) security concerns, (5) over-engineering or unnecessary complexity. For each issue: ISSUE: <description> | SUGGEST: <specific fix> | SEVERITY: HIGH/MED/LOW. End with VERDICT: approved OR needs_revision"

Phase 2: Claude Synthesizes

For each GPT issue, Claude responds:

AGREE — the plan needs to change here; note what revision is required
DISAGREE — explain why the plan already handles it or why GPT's concern is inapplicable
PARTIAL — the concern is valid but the suggested fix is wrong; propose a better fix

Phase 3: Output

Plan Status: APPROVED / NEEDS REVISION

GPT Issues + Claude Response:

Issue	Severity	Claude's Verdict	Required Change
<issue>	HIGH/MED/LOW	AGREE/DISAGREE/PARTIAL	<change or "none">

Required Changes Before Implementation: [Specific revisions needed — these block implementation]

Optional Improvements: [Suggestions worth considering but not blocking]

If APPROVED:

If tessera MCP is active: call plan_save with project_name, subtask_name, task, and plan_markdown=<full plan text> to register the reviewed plan for compliance tracking
Confirm the user is ready to proceed to implementation

If NEEDS REVISION: present the revised plan for user confirmation before implementation. Re-run plan_save after the revision is confirmed.