Loading...
Loading...
Found 5 Skills
peer-review a plan, design, or implementation, find the one critical risk, list other gaps, propose a fix for the critical risk, and update the plan. Triggers: peer review a plan, review an implementation, assess a design, check a proposal for gaps.
Review an implementation against task file requirements. Checks every spec scenario and Done When criterion, identifies gaps, and reports them. Use when the user says "task compliance", "check compliance", "review against the task", or to verify implementation completeness before shipping.
Invoke a Rubber Duck Reviewer subagent to independently critique plans and implementations before proceeding. Use when the agent is about to implement a non-trivial plan (multi-file changes, architectural decisions, security-sensitive logic, database schema changes), after completing a self-contained unit of work (module, endpoint, feature), when stuck or facing repeated failures (same test fails 2+ times, unexpected results), or when the agent wants independent validation of assumptions and design decisions. Triggers on any non-trivial implementation task where independent critique would catch blind spots before they become costly mistakes.
Generates a structured implementation report reflecting on a just-completed feature — what was done, divergences, challenges. Use right after finishing an implementation, as the input to a system review.
Review and compare UX designs, flows, prototypes, specifications, or implementations against user goals, evidence, interaction behavior, accessibility, design-system fit, content, and engineering intent. Use when a designer asks for critique, comparison, tough feedback, review before approval, or wants to check whether implementation preserved the intended experience.