AgentSkillsCN

review-plan-implementation

循环运行本地 Supabase 重置、数据库测试与类型生成，直至成功完成，并在每次运行之间及时修复问题。当用户要求重置本地 Supabase 数据库、运行 `supabase test db`，并在循环中重新生成类型（`npm run gen-types`）时，可使用此技能。

SKILL.md
--- frontmatter
name: review-plan-implementation
description: Review an implemented .plan.md by executing the instructions in its ## Reviewer Handoff section.
metadata:
  short-description: Review plan implementation

Review Plan Implementation

Goal

Given a .plan.md file, validate the implementation by following the plan's ## Reviewer Handoff instructions and reporting whether code changes align with the plan.

When to use

Use this skill when a user asks to review, verify, or audit work completed from a plan file in .cursor/plans/*.plan.md.

Minimal workflow

  1. •

    Load and validate the plan file

    • •Read the provided .plan.md path.
    • •Confirm YAML frontmatter exists and todos are present.
    • •Confirm a ## Reviewer Handoff section exists.
    • •If ## Reviewer Handoff is missing, stop and report that the plan cannot be reviewed with this skill until that section is added.
  2. •

    Extract handoff instructions

    • •Parse the ## Reviewer Handoff section and identify:
      • •Implementation summary claims
      • •File-level changelog entries
      • •UI manual verification checklist
  3. •

    Review plan alignment (code review mindset)

    • •Compare completed todos in frontmatter to the claimed implementation in ## Reviewer Handoff.
    • •Inspect changed files and verify claims are accurate.
    • •Prioritize findings:
      • •Bugs
      • •Behavioral regressions
      • •Missing or incorrect implementation versus the plan
      • •Missing tests or verification gaps
    • •If no issues are found, explicitly state that.
  4. •

    Execute or delegate UI verification

    • •Use the UI checklist from ## Reviewer Handoff as the source of truth.
    • •Assume the tester has no codebase context.
    • •Ensure each UI step references a route/page and specific on-page area (section/panel/table).
    • •If a step is ambiguous (for example component names only), rewrite it into actionable user-facing steps and call out that rewrite.
  5. •

    Report format

    • •Present findings first, ordered by severity, with file references where applicable.
    • •Then provide:
      • •Open questions/assumptions
      • •Plan alignment verdict (aligned, partially aligned, not aligned)
      • •UI verification status and any blockers

Output template

Use this structure:

markdown
Review target: `<plan filepath>`

Findings:
1. [Severity] <title> — `<file path:line>`
1. [Severity] <title> — `<file path:line>`

Open questions / assumptions:
1. <question or assumption>

Plan alignment verdict: <aligned | partially aligned | not aligned>

UI verification:
1. <what was verified>
1. <what remains or is blocked>

Notes

  • •Do not modify the plan status while reviewing unless the user explicitly asks for updates.
  • •Treat ## Reviewer Handoff as the authoritative review scope unless the user expands scope.
  • •If the user asks for a strict sign-off decision, provide a clear yes/no with rationale.