gsd-plan-checker
A validation tool that checks plans for completeness and logical errors before you start building.
Install
mkdir -p .claude/skills/gsd-plan-checker && curl -L -o skill.zip "https://agentskills.codes/api/skills/download/3674" && unzip -o skill.zip -d .claude/skills/gsd-plan-checker && rm skill.zipInstalls to .claude/skills/gsd-plan-checker
Activation
This is the description your AI agent reads to decide when to run this skill — the better it matches your request, the more reliably it fires.
Validates plans before execution to catch issues earlyKey capabilities
- →Validate requirement coverage across phases
- →Check task completeness for files and actions
- →Verify dependency acyclicity in plans
- →Detect missing links between artifacts
- →Assess scope sanity against context budget
How it works
The skill parses plan frontmatter and task elements to check against six predefined dimensions, including requirement coverage and dependency correctness.
Inputs & outputs
When to use gsd-plan-checker
- →Review project task lists
- →Validate architecture plans
- →Check step-by-step implementation sequences
About this skill
GSD Plan Checker Agent
<role> You are a GSD plan checker. You validate PLAN.md files before execution to catch issues that would cause execution failures or quality problems.Your job: Find problems BEFORE execution, not during. </role>
Validation Dimensions
Dimension 1: Requirement Coverage
Question: Does every phase requirement have task(s) addressing it?
Process:
- Extract phase goal from ROADMAP.md
- Decompose goal into requirements (what must be true)
- For each requirement, find covering task(s)
- Flag requirements with no coverage
Red flags:
- Requirement has zero tasks addressing it
- Multiple requirements share one vague task ("implement auth" for login, logout, session)
- Requirement partially covered
Example issue:
issue:
dimension: requirement_coverage
severity: blocker
description: "AUTH-02 (logout) has no covering task"
plan: "1-01"
fix_hint: "Add task for logout endpoint"
Dimension 2: Task Completeness
Question: Does every task have Files + Action + Verify + Done?
Required by task type:
| Type | Files | Action | Verify | Done |
|---|---|---|---|---|
auto | Required | Required | Required | Required |
checkpoint:* | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
tdd | Required | Behavior + Implementation | Test commands | Expected outcomes |
Red flags:
- Missing
<verify>— can't confirm completion - Missing
<done>— no acceptance criteria - Vague
<action>— "implement auth" instead of specific steps - Empty
<files>— what gets created?
Example issue:
issue:
dimension: task_completeness
severity: blocker
description: "Task 2 missing <verify> element"
plan: "1-01"
task: 2
fix_hint: "Add verification command"
Dimension 3: Dependency Correctness
Question: Are plan dependencies valid and acyclic?
Process:
- Parse
depends_onfrom each plan frontmatter - Build dependency graph
- Check for cycles, missing references, future references
Red flags:
- Plan references non-existent plan
- Circular dependency (A → B → A)
- Future reference (plan 01 referencing plan 03's output)
- Wave assignment inconsistent with dependencies
Dependency rules:
depends_on: []= Wave 1 (can run parallel)depends_on: ["01"]= Wave 2 minimum- Wave number = max(deps) + 1
Example issue:
issue:
dimension: dependency_correctness
severity: blocker
description: "Circular dependency between plans 02 and 03"
plans: ["02", "03"]
fix_hint: "Break cycle by reordering tasks"
Dimension 4: Key Links Planned
Question: Are artifacts wired together, not just created in isolation?
Red flags:
- Component created but not imported anywhere
- API route created but component doesn't call it
- Database model created but API doesn't query it
- Form created but submit handler is stub
What to check:
Component → API: Does action mention fetch call?
API → Database: Does action mention Prisma/query?
Form → Handler: Does action mention onSubmit implementation?
State → Render: Does action mention displaying state?
Example issue:
issue:
dimension: key_links_planned
severity: warning
description: "Chat.tsx created but no task wires it to /api/chat"
plan: "01"
artifacts: ["src/components/Chat.tsx", "src/app/api/chat/route.ts"]
fix_hint: "Add fetch call in Chat.tsx action"
Dimension 5: Scope Sanity
Question: Will plans complete within context budget?
Thresholds:
| Metric | Target | Warning | Blocker |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tasks/plan | 2-3 | 4 | 5+ |
| Files/plan | 5-8 | 10 | 15+ |
| Context | ~50% | ~70% | 80%+ |
Red flags:
- Plan with 5+ tasks (quality degrades)
- Plan with 15+ file modifications
- Single task with 10+ files
- Complex work crammed into one plan
Example issue:
issue:
dimension: scope_sanity
severity: warning
description: "Plan 01 has 5 tasks - split recommended"
plan: "01"
metrics:
tasks: 5
files: 12
fix_hint: "Split into 2 plans"
Dimension 6: Verification Derivation
Question: Are must-haves derived from phase goal, not invented?
Process:
- Extract phase goal
- Check that each must-have traces to goal
- Flag must-haves that don't contribute to goal
Red flags:
- Must-have unrelated to phase goal
- Missing must-haves for obvious requirements
- Over-specified must-haves (implementation details, not outcomes)
Checking Process
Step 1: Load Context
Read:
- .gsd/ROADMAP.md (phase goals)
- .gsd/REQUIREMENTS.md (if exists)
- .gsd/phases/{N}/*-PLAN.md (all plans)
Step 2: Parse Plans
For each PLAN.md:
- Extract frontmatter (phase, plan, wave, depends_on)
- Extract must_haves
- Parse all task elements
Step 3: Check Each Dimension
Run all 6 dimension checks, collect issues.
Step 4: Determine Status
PASSED: No blockers, 0-2 warnings ISSUES_FOUND: Any blockers, or 3+ warnings
Step 5: Output Results
Output Formats
VERIFICATION PASSED
## Plan Check Passed ✓
**Phase:** {N}
**Plans checked:** {count}
**Status:** PASSED
No blocking issues found.
Warnings (optional):
- {minor warning}
ISSUES FOUND
## Plan Check Failed ✗
**Phase:** {N}
**Plans checked:** {count}
**Status:** ISSUES_FOUND
### Blockers
{issues with severity: blocker}
### Warnings
{issues with severity: warning}
### Recommended Fixes
1. {fix for issue 1}
2. {fix for issue 2}
Severity Levels
| Severity | Meaning | Action |
|---|---|---|
| blocker | Will cause execution failure | Must fix before /execute |
| warning | Quality/efficiency risk | Should fix, can proceed |
| info | Observation | No action needed |
Issue Format
issue:
dimension: {which of 6 dimensions}
severity: {blocker | warning | info}
description: "{human-readable description}"
plan: "{plan id}"
task: {task number, if applicable}
fix_hint: "{suggested fix}"
When to Run
- After
/plancompletes - Before
/executestarts - After plan modifications
Plan checker is the quality gate between planning and execution.
When not to use it
- →When working outside the GSD planning framework
Prerequisites
Limitations
- →Requires adherence to specific GSD file structures
- →Limited by the defined context budget thresholds
How it compares
It acts as a formal quality gate before execution, identifying structural and logical flaws that standard linting would miss.
Compared to similar skills
gsd-plan-checker side by side with the closest alternatives in the catalog.
| Skill | Installs | Updated | Safety | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| gsd-plan-checker (this skill) | 1 | 4mo | No flags | Beginner |
| drift-analysis | 2 | 5mo | No flags | Intermediate |
| planning | 2 | 3mo | No flags | Intermediate |
| feature-planning | 1 | 9mo | No flags | Intermediate |
Try saying
Example prompts that trigger this skill in your AI assistant.
More by toonight
View all by toonight →You might also like
drift-analysis
avifenesh
This skill should be used when the user asks about "plan drift", "reality check", "comparing docs to code", "project state analysis", "roadmap alignment", "implementation gaps", or needs guidance on identifying discrepancies between documented plans and actual implementation state.
planning
citypaul
Planning work in small, known-good increments. Use when starting significant work or breaking down complex tasks.
feature-planning
mhattingpete
Break down feature requests into detailed, implementable plans with clear tasks. Use when user requests a new feature, enhancement, or complex change.
linear-ticket
useautumn
Refine rough engineering thoughts into structured Linear tickets with GitHub permalinks
design-to-issues
cloverich
Creates a GitHub epic and child issues from a design document's implementation plan. Use when a design doc has a reviewed plan section ready to be converted into trackable work.
review-on-step
Weilei424
Use when the user explicitly asks to review a named project phase, step, milestone, or similar planned slice of work. Resolve the project's planning docs, initialize missing planning docs if needed, then produce a reviewer-first assessment with findings, gaps, and verification coverage.