agentsclimarketplace

Review design

Skill serpro69/claude-toolbox/klaude-plugin/skills/review-design

Minimal by design, explicitly multi-lang, production-ready and battle-tested collection of configs and plugins for your Claude Code agentic development workflows: mcp, configs, skills, agents and more.

Install
npx -y skills add serpro69/claude-toolbox --skill review-design

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

  • no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Review design, implementation, and task documents produced by design. Evaluates document quality, internal consistency, and technical soundness. Use after design completes and before starting implement.

SKILL.md

5.9 KB, ~1.1k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

Design Review

Conventions

Overview

Pre-implementation review gate that evaluates design documents produced by /kk:design before code is written. Sits between /kk:design (creates docs) and /kk:implement (executes them). Reviews tree distinct dimensions

  • document quality/structure (completeness, internal consistency, clarity, convention adherence)
  • technical soundness (architectural viability, edge cases, failure modes, trade-off analysis)
  • feature value (Does the feature improve things for end-users? Is it useful? Is it correct in how it tries to solve the problem?)

Review Modes

Standard Mode (/kk:review-design)

Reviews design documents in the main conversation context. Fast, single-pass review using the workflow below.

Isolated Mode (/kk:review-design:isolated)

Delegates detection to independent reviewers that did not participate in the design, then annotates their findings with author context. Two parallel reviewers: a design-reviewer sub-agent and pal codereview (external model in native format). Produces a report organized by agreement level with corroborated findings highlighted.

  • Cost: Higher (sub-agent + external model + annotation)
  • Isolation: True — reviewers have zero authorship bias or session context
  • Degradation: Graceful — if one reviewer fails, proceeds with the other; if both fail, suggests standard mode fallback
  • Best for: When extra rigor is worth the cost (before starting implementation of high-stakes features)

See review-isolated.md for the isolated workflow.

Finding Types

TypeCodeDescription
Incomplete SpecINCOMPLETESection lacks sufficient detail for implementation
Internal InconsistencyINCONSISTENTTwo parts of the docs contradict each other
Technical RiskTECH_RISKArchitecture choice has unaddressed failure modes, scalability concerns, or edge cases
Missing ConcernMISSINGCross-cutting concern is absent (error handling, migration, backwards compatibility)
AmbiguityAMBIGUOUSRequirements can be interpreted multiple ways, likely to cause implementation divergence
Structure IssueSTRUCTUREDocument doesn't follow project conventions — missing sections, vague subtasks

Severity Levels

LevelNameDescriptionAction
P0CriticalFundamental flaw — design will not work as described, or critical requirement is missingMust fix before implementation
P1HighSignificant gap — likely to cause rework or wrong implementationShould fix before implementation
P2MediumModerate concern — ambiguity or missing detail that could cause confusionFix or create follow-up
P3LowMinor — style, structure, or nitpickOptional

Workflow

Mandatory order — methodology before evaluation. The flow below is strictly sequential. Do not evaluate document quality, assess technical soundness, or form findings until this SKILL.md and the process file are fully loaded. The design documents are both instruction context (they define what the feature is) and subject matter (they are what you evaluate) — but the review methodology and rubric must be loaded first.

Phases:

  1. Load documents — parse scope, locate feature directory, read in-scope docs
  2. Capy search — search kk:arch-decisions and kk:review-findings for prior context
  3. Document quality review — completeness, clarity, consistency, convention adherence
  4. Technical soundness review — viability, edge cases, trade-offs, scalability, testing strategy
  5. Self-check and confidence assessment — re-read, question assumptions, assign confidence
  6. Present findings with next steps

See review-process.md for the detailed step-by-step process.

Invocation

Post-design gate. This is the recommended review step after /kk:design completes and before /kk:implement begins. The default scope reviews all documents, including task-format checks.

Standard mode — reviews all documents by default:

/kk:review-design [feature-name]

Standard mode with scope — review specific documents:

/kk:review-design [feature-name] design
/kk:review-design [feature-name] implementation
/kk:review-design [feature-name] tasks
ScopeDocuments reviewed
(none)design.md + implementation.md + tasks.md
designdesign.md only
implementationimplementation.md only
taskstasks.md only

Isolated mode with independent sub-agents:

/kk:review-design:isolated [feature-name]
/kk:review-design:isolated [feature-name] tasks

What ships with it: 4 files

17.1 KB alongside SKILL.md

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 326,984. 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.