Ensure accessibility in UI components including semantic HTML, ARIA attributes, keyboard navigation, and WCAG 2.2 AA compliance.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Verifies implementation plan quality across 8 dimensions (requirement-coverage, task-completeness, dependency-validity, scope-sanity, artifact-wiring, risk-assessment, testability, estimation-quality) and returns pass/fail with per-dimension scores.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
설치 방법 보기설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.
Score an implementation plan across 8 quality dimensions and gate execution on a minimum threshold.
Returns { pass, score, dimensions } where pass is true when overall score ≥ 60/100.
Invoke this skill before handing off a plan to executing agents:
Skill({ skill: 'plan-quality-verifier' });
Use when:
NO PLAN EXECUTES WITHOUT PASSING QUALITY VERIFICATION FIRST
A plan that scores < 60/100 must be revised before spawning executing agents.
Read the plan file:
cat .claude/context/plans/<plan-file>.md
Expected output: Raw markdown text of the plan.
const { verifyPlan } = require('.claude/lib/validation/plan-quality-verifier.cjs');
const planContent = require('fs').readFileSync('<plan-path>', 'utf8');
const result = verifyPlan(planContent);
console.log(JSON.stringify(result, null, 2));
Expected output:
{
"pass": true,
"score": 72,
"dimensions": [
{ "name": "requirement-coverage", "score": 8 },
{ "name": "task-completeness", "score": 7 },
{ "name": "dependency-validity", "score": 9 },
{ "name": "scope-sanity", "score": 6 },
{ "name": "artifact-wiring", "score": 7 },
{ "name": "risk-assessment", "score": 8 },
{ "name": "testability", "score": 7 },
{ "name": "estimation-quality", "score": 9 }
]
}
Verify: result.pass === true and result.score >= 60.
| Result | Action |
|---|---|
pass: true | Proceed — hand off plan to executing agents |
pass: false | Block — return feedback to planner with failing dimensions |
| Score 60-69 | Marginal pass — flag low-scoring dimensions for improvement in next iteration |
| Score < 40 | Hard block — plan needs significant rework before re-evaluation |
When pass: false, format feedback:
Plan quality check FAILED (score: {{score}}/100)
Failing dimensions (score < 6):
{{#each dimensions where score < 6}}
- {{name}}: {{score}}/10 — needs improvement
{{/each}}
Action required: Revise the plan and re-run verification.
| Dimension | What it Measures | Good Signals |
|---|---|---|
| requirement-coverage | Are all stated requirements addressed by tasks? | Keywords: requirement, feature, user story |
| task-completeness | Do tasks have clear ownership and deliverables? | Keywords: implement, create, update, agent |
| dependency-validity | Are task dependencies explicit and cycle-free? | Keywords: depends, blocked by, after, before |
| scope-sanity | Is the plan scope realistic and bounded? | Phase/wave structure, bounded scope language |
| artifact-wiring | Are output artifacts explicitly listed per task? | Keywords: artifact, output, file, deliverable |
| risk-assessment | Are risks identified with mitigations? | Keywords: risk, mitigation, fallback, contingency |
| testability | Are acceptance criteria and test hooks defined? | Keywords: test, verify, acceptance, criteria |
| estimation-quality | Are effort/time estimates provided? | Keywords: estimate, hours, days, effort, wave |
Input validated against schemas/input.schema.json before execution.
Output contract defined in schemas/output.schema.json.
Before starting:
Read .claude/context/memory/learnings.md for past plan quality issues and common failures.
After completing:
.claude/context/memory/issues.md.claude/context/memory/learnings.mdASSUME INTERRUPTION: Your context may reset. If it's not in memory, it didn't happen.
plan-generator — Generates plans that should pass this verifierverification-before-completion — Gates task completion (complements plan gating)tdd — TDD methodology that complements testability dimension scoring.claude/lib/validation/plan-quality-verifier.cjstests/lib/validation/plan-quality-verifier.test.cjs.claude/skills/plan-quality-verifier/schemas/input.schema.json아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.
로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.
아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.
Ensure accessibility in UI components including semantic HTML, ARIA attributes, keyboard navigation, and WCAG 2.2 AA compliance.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when you want to improve response quality through meta-cognitive reasoning. Applies 15+ reasoning methods to reconsider and refine initial outputs.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
N-round opposing-stance debates for trade-off analysis. Assigns pro/con roles to agents, runs structured debate rounds with quality scoring, and produces a moderator synthesis with confidence-rated recommendation. Generalizable to architecture, technology, security, and design decisions.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Force adversarial code review stance that eliminates confirmation bias — reviewer must find issues or re-analyze
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Creates specialized AI agents on-demand when no existing agent matches a request. Use when the Router cannot find a suitable agent for a task. Enables self-evolution by generating persistent agents.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
LLM-as-judge evaluation framework with 5-dimension rubric (accuracy, groundedness, coherence, completeness, helpfulness) for scoring AI-generated content quality with weighted composite scores and evidence citations
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.