AGENT SKILL

plan-review-output-format

Output format specification for plan review agents. Defines the JSON schema, field reference, severity emoji prefixes, and finding body format for plan reviews.

License 许可
MIT
最近更新
2026-11-13
Stars
★ 34
Forks
2

01 前言 Front Matter

name
plan-review-output-format
description
Output format specification for plan review agents. Defines the JSON schema, field reference, severity emoji prefixes, and finding body format for plan reviews.
user-invocable
false
disable-model-invocation
true

02 资源文件 1

03 SKILL.md 正文

Plan Review Output Format

JSON Schema

Return your analysis as a JSON code block. Do not include any text before or after the JSON block — the orchestrator will parse this output directly.

{
  "lens": "<lens-identifier>",
  "summary": "2-3 sentence assessment from this lens perspective.",
  "strengths": [
    "Positive observation about what the plan gets right from this lens perspective"
  ],
  "findings": [
    {
      "severity": "critical",
      "confidence": "high",
      "lens": "<lens-identifier>",
      "location": "Phase 2, Section 3: Database Migration",
      "title": "Brief finding title",
      "body": "? **<Lens Name>**\n\n[Issue description — 1-2 sentences with enough context to understand standalone].\n\n**Impact**: [Why this matters — 1 sentence].\n\n**Suggestion**: [Concrete fix — 1-2 sentences]."
    }
  ]
}

Field Reference

  • lens: Agent lens identifier (e.g., "architecture", "security", "test-coverage", "code-quality", "standards", "usability", "performance", "documentation", "database", "correctness", "compatibility", "portability", "safety")
  • summary: 2-3 sentence assessment from this lens perspective. Reflect the key dimensions from the lens's Core Responsibilities. This is where holistic assessment lives, beyond individual findings.
  • strengths: Positive observations (fed into the review summary — never posted as individual findings)
  • findings: All findings, each referencing a location in the plan
    • severity: One of "critical", "major", "minor", "suggestion"
    • confidence: One of "high", "medium", "low"
    • lens: The lens identifier (same value as the top-level lens field). Included on each finding so the orchestrator can attribute findings after merging outputs from multiple agents.
    • location: Human-readable reference to the plan section where the finding is most relevant (e.g., "Phase 2: API Endpoints", "Implementation Approach", "Phase 1: Data Model")
    • title: Brief title for the finding (used in the summary index)
    • body: Self-contained finding body. See "Finding Body Format" below.

Severity Emoji Prefixes

Use these actual Unicode emoji characters at the start of each finding body:

  • ? for "critical" severity
  • ? for "major" severity
  • ? for "minor" and "suggestion" severity

IMPORTANT: Use the actual Unicode emoji characters shown above (? ? ?), NOT text shortcodes like :red_circle:, :yellow_circle:, or :blue_circle:. The output is rendered as markdown, not Slack/Discord, so shortcodes will appear as literal text.

Finding Body Format

Each finding body should follow this structure:

[emoji] **[Lens Name]**

[Issue description — 1-2 sentences, standalone context].

**Impact**: [Why this matters].

**Suggestion**: [Concrete fix].

Example:

? **Architecture**

The plan proposes a direct dependency from the API layer to the database schema
with no service abstraction. This couples the presentation layer to the data
model.

**Impact**: Database schema changes will ripple into the API layer, breaking
the dependency rule.

**Suggestion**: Introduce a service layer to mediate between the API handlers
and the data access layer.

Output only the JSON block — do not include additional prose, narrative analysis, or markdown outside the JSON code fence. The orchestrator parses your output as JSON.

04 同仓库更多 Skills

atomicinnovation
atomicinnovation/accelerator

explore-pr

Build an interactive, design-first and picture-first exploration page for a pull request — its architecture, abstractions and design decisions drawn as diagrams, a guided tour in reading order with code as the evidence, an attention map of where the risk sits, a ledger of its riskiest operations, prior review findings re-checked against the code, and simulations specific to the PR — with the reviewer's verdicts and notes saved. Use when the user wants to explore, understand or review a large pull request or its design, asks for a review page, walkthrough or visual explanation of a PR, or is struggling to review a big change.

设计师视觉设计
★ 34
atomicinnovation
atomicinnovation/accelerator

update-work-item

Update fields (status, priority, tags, parent, etc.) of an existing work item. Use to transition status, change priority, manage tags, or edit any frontmatter field. No transition enforcement — arbitrary changes are allowed.

★ 34
atomicinnovation
atomicinnovation/accelerator

sync-work-items

Reconcile local work items in meta/work/ with the active remote tracker named by work.integration. Use when the user wants to sync, push, or pull work items to or from Jira or Linear, preview what a sync would change, or reconcile divergent local and remote state.

★ 34
atomicinnovation
atomicinnovation/accelerator

sync-work-items-recovery

Recovery procedures for work sync failures that need a person — terminal rows, refused pending pushes and refused orders. Read by sync-work-items — not invoked directly.

★ 34
atomicinnovation
atomicinnovation/accelerator

stress-test-work-item

Interactively stress-test a work item by grilling the user on scope, assumptions, acceptance criteria, edge cases, and dependencies to surface issues, gaps, and flawed assumptions before implementation is planned.

测试与质量
★ 34
atomicinnovation
atomicinnovation/accelerator

review-work-item

Review a work item through multiple quality lenses and collaboratively iterate based on findings. Use when the user wants to evaluate a work item before implementation or escalation.

★ 34