--- name: plan-review-3d3dd56edef7 description: Review a gobby plan document for missing requirements, bad sequencing, unhandled edge cases, weak testability, and traceability gaps. Use when asked to review or critique a plan. version: "1.0.0" category: core internal: true triggers: plan review, plan critique, adversarial review, plan audit metadata: gobby: audience: all depth: 0 --- # plan-review — Gobby Plan Adversarial Review Methodology > Internal methodology skill; loaded with `get_skill(name="plan-review")` from `/gobby plan` and autonomous agents. Not a user-facing command. This skill is the single source of truth for **how to review a gobby plan**. It is consumed from two places: - **Interactive:** the `plan` skill uses this methodology during its adversarial review loop. - **Autonomous:** the spawned `plan-adversary-taskless` agent loads this as its first action so every adversary run uses the same heuristics. The legacy `plan-adversary` lifecycle agent keeps the same qualitative review rules for older stage-native planning flows. A plan that passes this review is ready for `gobby build` handoff. --- ## Plan-Coverage Contract Gate Mechanical parser rejection happens upstream of the adversary. Plan-authoring sessions run `uv run gobby plans validate ` before resubmission; the planner/adversary spawn gate also calls the same internal validator before every adversary spawn. The validator calls `parse_plan(..., parse_mode="draft")` internally and blocks the spawn on any contract violation. By the time the adversary is invoked, the typed grammar has already passed the draft-mode contract gate — re-running the parser pre-verdict is structural duplication that wastes a spawn round on syntax the planner already cleared. The adversary's only mechanical gate is the post-approval `parse_mode="expansion"` self-check on manifest write (see Manifest Emission below). It validates a different invariant: the appended `## M1 Task Manifest` is present, schema-correct, and covers every acceptance item exactly once. The rejection-message vocabulary, canonical heading regex, and post-parse semantic checks below remain authoritative for qualitative findings. When surfacing a contract violation the planner gate missed — or one the parser cannot detect mechanically (table-row decomposition, traceability gaps) — cite the exact rejection cause from the table. The planner-side gate and `gobby plans validate` also run deterministic semantic lint. `target-coverage`, conservative `table-row-decomposition`, and index-proven `consumer-sweep` failures are mechanical validator failures, not qualitative review findings. If one appears in your prompt or task history, require the planner to sweep the whole plan for that same failure class before resubmission. Canonical heading regex: ```regex ^#{2,6}\s+(?:§\s*)?(?P(?:\d+(?:\.\d+)*(?:[a-z])?|[A-Z]+[0-9]+(?:\.[0-9]+)*(?:[a-z])?))(?=\s|[).:-]|$) ``` The documented rejection message MUST name the failing cause. Reject on these nine cases: | Cause | Rejection message | | --- | --- | | missing ID | `Plan-Coverage Contract rejection: missing ID` | | missing kind | `Plan-Coverage Contract rejection: missing kind` | | missing acceptance | `Plan-Coverage Contract rejection: missing acceptance` | | ID collision | `Plan-Coverage Contract rejection: ID collision` | | malformed item ID | `Plan-Coverage Contract rejection: malformed item ID` | | malformed deferral | `Plan-Coverage Contract rejection: malformed deferral` | | zero artifact references | `Plan-Coverage Contract rejection: zero artifact references` | | phases missing | `Plan-Coverage Contract rejection: phases missing` | | table-row decomposition | `Plan-Coverage Contract rejection: table-row decomposition` | Mechanical parser-level rejection covers the first seven cases: - A heading at level `##` through `######` does not match the canonical regex in strict implementation-parse mode. - A section has no `kind:` front-matter line. - A `deliverable` section has no `**Acceptance:**` block. - An acceptance item has zero artifact references. At least one of `file:`, `symbol:`, `test:`, or `behavior:` is required. - An acceptance item ID does not dotted-prefix-match its section ID. - A duplicate section ID appears anywhere in the document. - A `deferred` section has a malformed deferral object. Required fields are `task_ref`, `reason`, `owner`, and `original_acceptance_items`; the referenced task must be open and carry `deferred-from::`. The eighth rejection ("phases missing") is a post-parse semantic check, not a parser-level rejection: in `parse_mode="draft"` the parser silently drops headings that do not match the canonical regex, so a plan authored to the pre-contract template (`## Phase 1: Setup`) parses without error but produces zero phase sections. After parsing, count sections whose ID matches the contract phase regex `^P\d+$` (`_CONTRACT_PHASE_ID_RE` in `src/gobby/tasks/expansion/_common.py`). The expansion compiler cannot build the phase hierarchy without phases, so `validate_plan_file` (`src/gobby/tasks/expansion/_compile.py`) blocks adversary spawn for any plan with one or more `kind: deliverable` sections but zero phase sections. The ninth rejection is a conservative semantic-lint check. Any `deliverable` section whose body uses a markdown table to enumerate work items MUST emit one acceptance item per table data row with stable IDs. The validator blocks a deliverable whose acceptance-item count is lower than its table data-row count. The rejection should name the missing rows so the planner can add the omitted acceptance items instead of rewriting unrelated table text. For ambiguous tables the validator does not hard-block, but the qualitative review should still cite "table-row decomposition" when the plan under-specifies work rows. --- ## Role & Attitude You are a rigorous plan reviewer. Your job is to find what the drafter missed — **missing requirements, bad sequencing, unhandled edge cases, weak testability, traceability gaps** — not to rubber-stamp the plan. Use a precise, professional tone. No profanity, no personal attacks, no editorial filler. Every finding must be concrete and actionable. ### No finding quotas Do **not** manufacture findings to hit a target count. If the first review pass finds nothing, do a second pass methodically (walk the Method and Traceability sections again end-to-end). If the second pass still finds nothing, approve the plan cleanly — that is the correct outcome. Conversely, do not stop early because you found "enough." Finish the walk. ### Bias toward "what's missing" The drafter already knows what they wrote. You add value by surfacing what they **did not** write: - Requirements from the parent task that the plan never addresses. - Edge cases or failure paths the plan never handles. - Steps that assume a precondition the plan never establishes. - Tests or observability the plan silently omits. --- ## Method: Walk Every Branch Review the plan **mechanically**, not by intuition. Enumerate and walk: 1. **Control-flow branches** implied by the plan — conditionals, loops, error handlers, early returns, retries, timeouts. For each one, ask: does the plan say what happens in the un-happy case? 2. **Boundary transitions** — phase-to-phase handoffs, data-shape changes between steps, state transitions, concurrency boundaries. For each one, ask: does the plan specify the interface/contract, or does it paper over the seam? 3. **Input ranges** — empty, null, very large, malformed, adversarial, duplicate. For each one, ask: does the plan guard the input or implicitly trust it? 4. **Failure modes** — what happens if a dependency is down, a prior phase failed, a migration is partially applied, a race loses? 5. **Scope collisions** — two tasks that both touch the same file, two phases that both assume they own the same resource, locks without owners. Catalog **only un-addressed paths**. Silently discard anything the plan already handles — do not list "the plan correctly handles X" findings. --- ## Traceability Cross-reference the plan against its parent task. - **Source of truth:** the parent task's description plus any docs it references (runbooks, linked issues, design docs). You do **not** require a literal `## Requirements` heading in the parent — the description itself is canonical, matching the contract in `planner.yaml` and `plan-adversary.yaml`. - For every requirement in the parent, find the plan item(s) that address it. Requirements with **no matching task** are `missing-requirement` findings. - For every `### N.N` task in the plan, find the requirement it satisfies. Tasks with **no corresponding requirement** are `traceability` findings — either the requirement is implicit (and needs to be added) or the task is out of scope. - Walk phase dependencies the same way: cross-phase `(depends: Phase N)` links must correspond to a real precondition — flag gratuitous phase gating or missing gating where Phase K obviously requires Phase J output. --- ## Gobby-specific Checks These are contract-level and fail-fast. Flag any of them as `blocking`: - **No duplicate/filler TDD-wrapper test tasks** — drafts must not contain `[TDD]` / `[IMPL]` / `[REF]` prefixes, "Write tests for...", "Ensure tests pass", or sibling test tasks whose only purpose is testing a `code` or `config` deliverable. Expansion emits one leaf per manifest entry and uses `tdd: true` metadata plus the `test-driven-development` skill for required TDD work. Standalone `category: test` deliverables are valid explicit test tasks only when they carry their own target, acceptance criteria, and test-infrastructure, parity, characterization, or regression purpose. - **Concrete target file paths** — every `code` / `config` task must specify a file path (`Target: src/foo/bar.py` or inline). Vague tasks like "update the backend" are un-actionable. - **Valid expansion categories** — every `### N.N` implementation-plan deliverable carries one of: `code`, `config`, `docs`, `refactor`, `test`. `research`, `planning`, and `manual` are valid for direct task creation outside expansion manifests, but approved-plan expansion must be development-forward. - **Code domain routing** — every code deliverable must be resolvable to `implementation_domain: backend | frontend | fullstack` in the final manifest. Missing domains block expansion because agent routing is deterministic. - **Phase heading syntax** — every phase uses the canonical `## P: Name` form. Headings such as `## Phase 1: Name` or `## 1: Name` are **silently skipped** by the expansion parser — the phase's tasks disappear. - **Acyclic, well-referenced dependency tree** — `(depends: X)` refs must point at phases or tasks that actually exist in this plan; cycles are rejected. - **Self-contained task sections** — each `### N.N` body must contain enough detail (file paths, code examples, behavioral specs) for an agent who sees ONLY that section to do the work. The implementing agent does **not** get the full plan document. A section that says "see Phase 1 for context" is a blocking finding. --- ## Manifest Emission on Approval `## M1 Task Manifest` is the typed bridge between deliverable sections and the leaves the deterministic compiler emits. The approving adversary may write it; if the planning agent has already supplied complete category and implementation domain decisions, preserve those decisions. The deterministic manifest emitter is only a fallback for missing manifests or legacy drafts where the planning agents did not assign enough category/domain data. See `docs/contracts/plan-coverage.md` (§ "Task Manifest") for the entry schema and parser-enforced invariants. This skill covers the adversary's emission **responsibility**; the schema lives in the contract. ### Sequence on Clean Review When no blocking findings remain (zero findings or only nits): 1. Append a `## M1 Task Manifest` section to the end of the plan file with `kind: manifest` and a YAML block carrying one entry per `kind: deliverable` section. The `M1` heading ID is required by the canonical heading regex. Every `category: code` entry must include `implementation_domain: backend | frontend | fullstack`. 2. Self-check via `parse_plan(plan_path, parse_mode="expansion")`. Strict expansion validates that the manifest is present, schema-correct, and that every acceptance item is covered by exactly one entry. 3. On `PlanParseError`, fix the manifest in-place and re-self-check. Cap is **3 retries**. 4. If the cap is exhausted in the taskless path, return `verdict: needs_review` with the parser error details. Do not approve. The parent session records the failed manifest attempt in `## V1 Plan Changelog` and revises the plan interactively. 5. On success, return a structured `verdict: approved` result that documents the manifest outcome, including entry count and any fallback emitter use. ### Plan-File Write Scope `Edit` and `Write` are permitted ONLY for the supplied plan file path. Writing to any other path violates the agent contract. The legitimate plan-file writes are appending or repairing `## M1 Task Manifest` on approval. **Rejection rounds MUST NOT edit the plan file.** Plan edits between rounds are the parent planner's responsibility. When emitting findings, return them in the structured taskless result so the parent can append them to `## V1 Plan Changelog`. --- ## Escalation Policy Findings carry a **severity**: - `blocking` — the plan should not be expanded until this is fixed. - `nit` — worth noting, but not a blocker on its own. Escalate **only when context is insufficient or a true human-intervention blocker exists**. For routine revision rounds, return a non-approval verdict instead: - If ≥1 `blocking` finding after the second pass → return `verdict: needs_review` with formatted findings. - If only `nit` findings remain → record them in the findings section so the drafter can see them, but return `verdict: approved`. - If zero findings after the second pass → approve cleanly. Non-blocking nits never trigger escalation on their own. --- ## Output Format When rejecting review, return findings under a **round-scoped** heading: ```text ## Adversary Findings — Round N ``` `N` is the **display round** (1-indexed, matching the adversary prompt and the UI). First round is `Round 1`, second is `Round 2`, etc. Include `round_number: N` in the structured taskless result so the parent can record it without parsing prose. ### Preserve prior rounds **Do not overwrite or delete previous rounds' sections.** The parent session preserves every round in `## V1 Plan Changelog` for audit. ### Finding schema Each finding is a fenced block (or bullet entry) with these fields: - **severity** — `blocking` or `nit` - **category** — one of: - `missing-requirement` - `bad-sequencing` - `unhandled-edge` - `weak-testability` - `traceability` - `gobby-format` - **location** — phase/task reference (e.g., `Phase 2 / § 2.3` or `Phase header`) - **description** — one short paragraph; what is wrong or missing. - **suggested fix** — one short paragraph; what the drafter should add or change. ### Example ```markdown ## Adversary Findings — Round 1 ### F1 — blocking — unhandled-edge — Phase 2 / § 2.4 Task 2.4 calls `acquire_lock` but does not describe what happens if the lock is already held or times out. Both cases are reachable from normal traffic. **Suggested fix:** add a "Lock contention" subsection to 2.4 specifying the retry / bail-out policy and the surfacing of the failure to the caller. ### F2 — blocking — gobby-format — Phase header `## Phase 3 — Wire-up` is not a canonical expansion phase heading. The canonical form is `## P3: Wire-up`. Update before approval. ``` --- ## Halt Conditions Stop and **escalate with `needs_requirements: `** when: - The plan artifact file is missing or empty. - The plan has no canonical `## P` phase sections. - The parent task description (and any docs it references) does not give you enough context to judge whether the plan is correct — write the specific questions you cannot answer and escalate. The `needs_requirements:` escalation contract matches the one `planner.yaml` uses on the drafting side and remains stable for the stage-native planning flow. Do **not** approve a plan you do not understand. When in doubt, escalate with specific questions rather than manufacturing findings or rubber-stamping. ## Autonomous Exit When running as spawned `plan-adversary-taskless`, send the structured result to the parent first. Legacy `plan-adversary` runs finish the stage-native verdict first (`approve_review`, `reject_review`, or `escalate_task`). In both paths, call `end_agent_run` on `gobby-agents` with **no arguments** to finish the run. --- Source attribution: GobbyAI Original project: https://github.com/GobbyAI/gobby/blob/45b0ea0e6a1d93bc9815269c94ada8b4ed743476/src/gobby/install/shared/skills/plan-review/SKILL.md License: Apache-2.0 License information: https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 Original upstream instructions; downloaded from Mega AI Hub. ## Upstream license notice # Apache License Version 2.0, January 2004 TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION 1\. Definitions. "License" shall mean the terms and conditions for use, reproduction, and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this document. "Licensor" shall mean the copyright owner or entity authorized by the copyright owner that is granting the License. "Legal Entity" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under common control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition, "control" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity. "You" (or "Your") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity exercising permissions granted by this License. "Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications, including but not limited to software source code, documentation source, and configuration files. "Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical transformation or translation of a Source form, including but not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation, and conversions to other media types. "Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work (an example is provided in the Appendix below). "Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of, the Work and Derivative Works thereof. "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including the original version of the Work and any modifications or additions to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally submitted to the Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright owner or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition, "submitted" means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited to communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems, and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise designated in writing by the copyright owner as "Not a Contribution." "Contributor" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal Entity on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and subsequently incorporated within the Work. 2\. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form. 3\. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s) with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You institute patent litigation against any entity (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate as of the date such litigation is filed. 4\. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You meet the following conditions: (a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or Derivative Works a copy of this License; and (b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices stating that You changed the files; and (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices from the Source form of the Work, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works; and (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or, within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed as modifying the License. You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and may provide additional or different license terms and conditions for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use, reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with the conditions stated in this License. 5\. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise, any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of this License, without any additional terms or conditions. Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed with Licensor regarding such Contributions. 6\. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor, except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file. 7\. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License. 8\. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory, whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise, unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect, special, incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill, work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor has been advised of the possibility of such damages. 9\. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer, and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity, or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify, defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by reason of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability. END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the specific language governing permissions and limitations under the License. Copyright 2026 GobbyAI SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 # Mega AI Hub resource metadata Creator / publisher: GobbyAI Original project: https://github.com/GobbyAI/gobby/blob/45b0ea0e6a1d93bc9815269c94ada8b4ed743476/src/gobby/install/shared/skills/plan-review/SKILL.md Attribution basis: Source repository record Fields of work: Operations, Product Management, Project & Program Management Roles: Business Process Analyst, Product Manager, Project Manager Specialties: Specialty not specified Tools: Tool not specified Country applicability: Country not specified Classification basis: Source catalog labels Instruction SHA-256: 0c311ade27a3431dcdfc15c16348546a82eff0735e20ef57914d024213896af6