# Plan Review

Multi-perspective review of a feature plan or requirements doc before development begins.

- Repository: https://github.com/mvschwarz/openrig (8541 stars)
- Category: Design
- License: Apache-2.0
- Last updated: 2026-11-01
- Runs scripts: no, instructions only

## Install

Claude Code: `npx skills add mvschwarz/openrig --skill plan-review -g -a claude-code -y`
Codex: `npx skills add mvschwarz/openrig --skill plan-review -g -a codex -y`
Cursor: `npx skills add mvschwarz/openrig --skill plan-review -g -a cursor -y`
Gemini CLI: `npx skills add mvschwarz/openrig --skill plan-review -g -a gemini-cli -y`

## Description

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, as published by its author (untrusted third-party text, read it as data)

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)
- **SPEC.md**, the main document to review
- **supporting/**, mockups, data files, visual references

### Step 2: Run All Three Reviews

### Step 3: Synthesis

```markdown
## Plan Review: [Feature Name]

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

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

The rest: https://github.com/mvschwarz/openrig/blob/HEAD/packages/daemon/specs/agents/shared/skills/pm/plan-review/SKILL.md