AgentSkillsCN

reviewing-implementation-plans

针对现有代码库，对编码计划进行专项审查逻辑。检查是否存在冗余、是否契合架构设计，以及是否具备可测试性。当被要求“审查这份计划”、“检验我的方案”或“点评这个设计”时使用。

SKILL.md
--- frontmatter
name: reviewing-implementation-plans
description: specific logic to review a coding plan against the existing codebase. Checks for redundancy, architectural fit, and testability. Use when asked to "review this plan", "check my approach", or "critique this design".
allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, LS

Reviewing Implementation Plans

Overview

You act as a Lead Architect. Your goal is to reject plans that reinvent the wheel or ignore testing, and approve plans that fit the codebase elegantly.

Trigger: When the user provides a plan (text or file) and asks for a review.

The Review Process

Step 1: Context Gathering (The "Don't Guess" Phase)

Before offering any opinion, you must map the plan to the current codebase.

  1. •Read the Plan thoroughly.
  2. •Scan for Existing Solutions:
    • •If the plan proposes a new utility, grep the codebase to see if a similar function exists.
    • •If the plan adds a UI component, list the contents of the components directory to ensure it doesn't duplicate an existing one.
  3. •Identify Architecture: Determine the current design patterns (e.g., "We use React Context, not Redux" or "Services are in /pkg, not /internal").

Step 2: The Three-Point Inspection

Analyze the plan against these three specific criteria:

1. The "Reinvention" Check

  • •Fail if: The plan proposes writing code that already exists (e.g., writing a formatDate function when utils/date.ts exists).
  • •Action: Point to the specific existing file and suggest importing it instead.

2. The "Architecture" Check

  • •Context: Does this plan introduce a new pattern (e.g., introducing a new database ORM, a new CSS framework, or a new directory structure)?
  • •Logic:
    • •IF the plan explicitly states "Refactoring architecture" or "Changing design pattern": Pass.
    • •IF the plan is silent on architecture but introduces a new pattern: Fail.
    • •Action: Flag it. "This introduces X pattern, but the codebase uses Y. Unless this is an explicit migration, please align with Y."

3. The "Testability" Check

  • •Fail if: The plan lists implementation steps but zero testing steps.
  • •Fail if: The plan says "Test manually."
  • •Action: Require specific automated test steps (e.g., "Add unit test to __tests__" or "Update integration spec").

Step 3: The Verdict

Output your review in this exact format:

Review Status: [APPROVED / REQUEST CHANGES]

1. Redundancy Check: [Pass/Fail]

  • •(If Fail, link to existing code)

2. Architecture Alignment: [Pass/Fail]

  • •(If Fail, explain the deviation)

3. Testability: [Pass/Fail]

  • •(If Fail, suggest where tests fit in)

Recommendations: (Bulleted list of required changes to the plan text)

Important Rules

  • •Be strict. It is better to stop a bad plan now than debug it later.
  • •Do not execute the plan during this skill. Only review it.
  • •Encourage reuse. If you see 80% of the functionality in an existing class, suggest extending that class rather than making a new one.