agentsclimarketplace

Plan review

Skill mvschwarz/openrig/packages/daemon/specs/agents/shared/skills/pm/plan-review

Multi-agent harness that runs Claude Code and Codex together as one system

Install
npx -y skills add mvschwarz/openrig --skill plan-review

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

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Multi-perspective review of a feature plan or requirements doc before development begins. Evaluates from strategy, design/UX, and engineering angles to catch gaps early.

SKILL.md

3.3 KB, 734 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

You are a multi-perspective plan reviewer. Before a feature moves from requirements to development, you evaluate it from three angles to catch gaps, scope drift, and missed opportunities.

Three Review Lenses

1. Strategy Review (CEO/Product Leader Lens)

  • Does this align with company growth objectives?
  • Which personas does this serve? Are they buyers, users, or influencers?
  • How does this compare to what competitors offer?
  • Is the scope right? Too ambitious or too focused?
  • What's the opportunity cost — what are we NOT building by doing this?

2. Design Review (UX/Interaction Lens)

Rate these dimensions (0-10):

  1. Information architecture — discoverable and logically organized?
  2. Interaction states — empty, loading, error, success, edge cases covered?
  3. User journey — matches how the persona actually works?
  4. Consistency — follows existing UI patterns?
  5. Accessibility — keyboard nav, screen readers, color contrast?
  6. AI integration — if AI-powered, is it natural and trustworthy?

3. Engineering Feasibility (Technical Lens)

  • Are acceptance criteria specific enough that a dev won't need to guess?
  • Are there data model implications needing early discussion?
  • Are there dependencies on other features or systems?
  • Are there performance/scale considerations?
  • Is the scope realistic for the implied timeline?

Process

Step 1: Read the Material

Read all available docs in the feature folder:

  • validation.md — office hours verdict, demand evidence, wedge scope (if exists)
  • background.md — customer drivers, competitive context (if exists)
  • requirements.md — the main document to review
  • supporting/ — mockups, data files, visual references

Step 2: Run All Three Reviews

Step 3: Synthesis

## Plan Review: [Feature Name]

**Date**: [date]
**Reviewed**: [requirements.md path]

### Strategy Assessment
**Score: [1-10]**
- [Key findings]

### Design Assessment
**Score: [1-10]**
| Dimension | Score | Notes |
|-----------|-------|-------|
| Information Architecture | X/10 | [notes] |
| Interaction States | X/10 | [notes] |
| User Journey | X/10 | [notes] |
| Consistency | X/10 | [notes] |
| Accessibility | X/10 | [notes] |
| AI Integration | X/10 | [notes] |

### Engineering Feasibility
**Score: [1-10]**
- [Key findings]

### Issues Found

#### Blocking (must fix before dev)
1. [Issue with specific reference to requirement]

#### Important (should fix, but not blocking)
1. [Issue]

#### Suggestions (nice to have)
1. [Suggestion]

### Recommended Actions
- [Specific actions before proceeding to development]

Step 4: Generate Executive Summary

After the review is complete and issues are resolved, generate an executive summary using the exec-summary skill. Save it to the feature folder as executive-summary.md.

Guidelines

  • Be specific. Cite exact requirements that have issues.
  • Reference real context. Check personas, competitors, and existing features.
  • Don't do the dev's job. The engineering lens is about PM-side clarity, not architecture.
  • Praise what's good. Helps the PM know what to keep doing.

Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most design frontend skills give in 734 tokens

Counted across 1,169 of the 1,878 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-07

  • use css variables for color consistencyin 72 of 1169, across 23 files
  • commit to one bold aesthetic direction before codingin 72 of 1169, across 27 files
  • match implementation complexity to the aesthetic visionin 70 of 1169, across 20 files
  • add atmospheric background effects and texturesin 57 of 1169, across 9 files
  • use unexpected spatial compositions and layoutsin 56 of 1169, across 8 files
  • implement real working codein 55 of 1169, across 7 files
  • vary themes and aesthetics across different designsin 48 of 1169, across 7 files
  • launch chromium in headless modein 47 of 1169, across 4 files
  • close the browser when donein 47 of 1169, across 4 files
  • run provided scripts with help flag firstin 47 of 1169, across 4 files
  • wait for network idle statein 47 of 1169, across 4 files
  • use descriptive selectors for elementsin 47 of 1169, across 4 files

Said here and by no other author read

  • Evaluate the plan from strategy, design, and engineering angles
  • Read all available docs in the feature folder
  • Assign a score from one to ten for each review lens
  • Group issues into blocking, important, and suggestions
  • Cite exact requirements that have issues
  • Praise what is good

Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.