a5bba3dc54
Add optional review and refine step to workflows:brainstorm and workflows:plan that checks documents for clarity, completeness, user intent, and YAGNI. - New document-review skill with review questions and evaluation criteria - Brainstorm Phase 4 offers "Review and refine" option - Plan post-generation offers "Review and refine" after technical review - Includes YAGNI-based simplification guidance - Max 2 iteration rounds before suggesting to proceed Co-authored-by: Kieran Klaassen <kieranklaassen@users.noreply.github.com>
3.1 KiB
name, description
| name | description |
|---|---|
| document-review | This skill should be used to refine brainstorm or plan documents before proceeding to the next workflow step. It applies when a brainstorm or plan document exists and the user wants to improve it. |
Document Review
Improve brainstorm or plan documents through structured review.
Step 1: Get the Document
If a document path is provided: Read it, then proceed to Step 2.
If no document is specified: Ask which document to review, or look for the most recent brainstorm/plan in docs/brainstorms/ or docs/plans/.
Step 2: Assess
Read through the document and ask:
- What is unclear?
- What is unnecessary?
- What decision is being avoided?
- What assumptions are unstated?
- Where could scope accidentally expand?
These questions surface issues. Don't fix yet—just note what you find.
Step 3: Evaluate
Score the document against these criteria:
| Criterion | What to Check |
|---|---|
| Clarity | Problem statement is clear, no vague language ("probably," "consider," "try to") |
| Completeness | Required sections present, constraints stated, open questions flagged |
| Specificity | Concrete enough for next step (brainstorm → can plan, plan → can implement) |
| YAGNI | No hypothetical features, simplest approach chosen |
If invoked within a workflow (after /workflows:brainstorm or /workflows:plan), also check:
- User intent fidelity — Document reflects what was discussed, assumptions validated
Step 4: Identify the Critical Improvement
Among everything found in Steps 2-3, does one issue stand out? If something would significantly improve the document's quality, this is the "must address" item. Highlight it prominently.
Step 5: Make Changes
Present your findings, then:
- Auto-fix minor issues (vague language, formatting) without asking
- Ask approval before substantive changes (restructuring, removing sections, changing meaning)
- Update the document inline—no separate files, no metadata sections
Simplification Guidance
Simplification is purposeful removal of unnecessary complexity, not shortening for its own sake.
Simplify when:
- Content serves hypothetical future needs, not current ones
- Sections repeat information already covered elsewhere
- Detail exceeds what's needed to take the next step
- Abstractions or structure add overhead without clarity
Don't simplify:
- Constraints or edge cases that affect implementation
- Rationale that explains why alternatives were rejected
- Open questions that need resolution
Step 6: Offer Next Action
After changes are complete, ask:
- Refine again - Another review pass
- Review complete - Document is ready
Iteration Guidance
After 2 refinement passes, recommend completion—diminishing returns are likely. But if the user wants to continue, allow it.
Return control to the caller (workflow or user) after selection.
What NOT to Do
- Do not rewrite the entire document
- Do not add new sections or requirements the user didn't discuss
- Do not over-engineer or add complexity
- Do not create separate review files or add metadata sections