skills/system-review/SKILL.md
Use when performing a meta-level analysis of plan adherence after implementation to identify process improvements and suggest CLAUDE.md updates
npx skillsauth add giladresisi/ai-dev-env system-reviewInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Perform a meta-level analysis of how well the implementation followed the plan and identify process improvements.
System review is NOT code review. You're not looking for bugs in the code - you're looking for bugs in the process.
Your job:
Philosophy:
You will analyze key artifacts:
PROGRESS.md: Read this to find all notes for the current feature including:
Generated Plan: Read this to understand what the agent was SUPPOSED to do. Look up plan file location from PROGRESS.md
Execution Report & Code Review:
Read .agents/execution-reports/ and .agents/code-reviews/ for this feature if they exist — they document divergences, challenges, and issues found post-execution.
Skills used in the session:
Identify which ai-dev-env:* skills were invoked (from PROGRESS.md, session summary, or conversation context). These are the skills you will inspect and improve in Step 6.
MANDATORY FIRST STEP:
PROGRESS.md to find the feature being reviewedRead the generated plan (from PROGRESS.md reference) and extract:
Read the execution report from PROGRESS.md and extract:
For each divergence identified in the execution report, classify as:
Good Divergence ✅ (Justified):
Bad Divergence ❌ (Problematic):
For each problematic divergence, identify the root cause:
Based on patterns across divergences, suggest:
CRITICAL: Create review in .agents/system-reviews/ folder
Extract the feature/module name from PROGRESS.md or the execution report. Example: "module-5-multi-format-enhancement" from execution report path
Create file: .agents/system-reviews/{feature-name}.md
Use Write tool to create this file with the following structure:
# System Review: [Feature Name]
**Generated:** [Current date/time]
## Meta Information
- Plan reviewed: [path to plan file]
- Execution report: `.agents/execution-reports/{feature-name}.md`
- Executor: [team-based/sequential/etc]
- Date: [current date]
## Overall Alignment Score: X/10
**Scoring rationale:**
- [breakdown of scoring]
[Summary paragraph explaining overall alignment]
## Divergence Analysis
### Divergence 1: [Title]
```yaml
divergence: [what changed]
planned: [what plan specified]
actual: [what was implemented]
reason: [agent's stated reason from report]
classification: good ✅ | bad ❌ | environmental ⚠️
justified: yes/no
root_cause: [unclear plan | missing context | etc]
impact: [describe impact]
Assessment: [detailed analysis of this divergence]
[Repeat for each divergence]
Exemplary/Concerning: [highlight notable observations]
[x]/[ ] Document [pattern X] discovered during implementation:
[Actual suggested text to add]
[x]/[ ] Add anti-pattern warning for [Y]:
[Actual suggested text to add]
[Actual suggested text to add]
[skill-name] for [manual process]
Planning Phase: ✅/⚠️/❌ [Rating]
Execution Phase: ✅/⚠️/❌ [Rating]
Validation Phase: ✅/⚠️/❌ [Rating]
Documentation: ✅/⚠️/❌ [Rating]
Based on patterns discovered during this implementation, add these sections:
[Complete markdown text to add to CLAUDE.md]
[Complete markdown text to add to CLAUDE.md]
Overall Assessment: [comprehensive summary]
Process Improvements Identified:
Recommended Actions:
Ready for Next Module: Yes/No - [reasoning]
### Step 3: Update PROGRESS.md
**Use Edit tool to add/update in PROGRESS.md under the current feature:**
```markdown
### Reports Generated
**Execution Report:** `.agents/execution-reports/{feature-name}.md`
- [Brief summary of execution report]
**System Review:** `.agents/system-reviews/{feature-name}.md`
- Alignment score: X/10
- Divergence analysis (X identified: Y justified, Z problematic)
- Process improvements and CLAUDE.md updates [completed/recommended]
- Key learnings and recommendations for next implementation
Do NOT include the full review content in PROGRESS.md - only the reference.
After completing the system review document (Steps 1–5 and Output Format), inspect and update the SKILL.md files for every skill that was invoked in this session. Changes go through a worktree + pull request — never directly into ~/.claude/.
Scan the following sources to build the list of invoked skills:
ai-dev-env:* skill invocationsSkills to look for (any that were used):
execute, acceptance-criteria-validate, acceptance-criteria-define, code-review, code-review-fix, plan-feature, execution-report, system-review
The canonical source repo is at ~/projects/ai-dev-env. Verify it exists:
ls ~/projects/ai-dev-env/skills/
If it doesn't exist, the repo may need to be cloned first. The remote is visible in the cached copy:
cd ~/.claude/plugins/cache/ai-dev-env-marketplace/ai-dev-env/1.0.0 && git remote -v
Never edit files under ~/.claude/plugins/ directly — that is an installed cache. Changes there are not tracked in the source repo and will be overwritten on next plugin update.
Use the ai-dev-env:create-worktree skill with origin/main as the base branch so the worktree starts from the remote state, not any local divergence:
/create-worktree improve-skills-from-<feature-name> origin/main
Replace <feature-name> with the slug of the feature just reviewed (e.g., extractive-summarization).
The working directory for subsequent steps will be ../ai-dev-env-skill-improvements.
For each skill, review the divergence analysis, code review findings, and challenges from this session and ask: "What instruction was missing from this skill that would have prevented this issue?"
Apply improvements in these priority tiers:
Tier 1 — Missing mandatory step: A process step that should have been enforced but wasn't. Add it explicitly with MANDATORY language.
Tier 2 — Ambiguous instruction: An instruction that led to two valid interpretations, one of which caused a problem. Clarify it.
Tier 3 — Missing context: The skill lacked awareness of project conventions it needed. Update the instruction to be more flexible or explicit.
Do NOT apply:
For each improvement identified:
cd ~/projects/ai-dev-env-skill-improvements
git diff --stat # verify only intended lines changed
git add skills/<skill-name>/SKILL.md ...
git commit -m "improve <skills>: <one-line summary of what changed and why>"
git push -u origin improve-skills-from-<feature-name>
gh pr create --title "Improve skills from <feature-name> session learnings" --body "..."
In the PR body, list each skill changed, what was changed, and the session evidence that motivated it.
After the PR is open, add a "Skill Improvements Applied" section to PROGRESS.md:
### Skill Improvements Applied
**PR:** <GitHub PR URL>
**Branch:** `improve-skills-from-<feature-name>`
| Skill | Change | Reason |
|-------|--------|--------|
| `execute` | ... | ... |
~/projects/ai-dev-env, never in ~/.claude/plugins/testing
Creates a new git worktree in the auto-co-trader project for any purpose — optimization, regression, backtesting, brainstorming, etc. Use this skill when the user wants to CREATE or SET UP a new worktree — phrases like "prepare a new worktree", "set up a worktree", "create a new worktree for <purpose>", "prep a new worktree", "new worktree for autoresearch", "prepare optimization from [strategy]", or "create a worktree using [strategy]". Do NOT use this skill when the user is already in a worktree and wants to start/run/begin a task — that is handled by the relevant program file in the worktree session.
development
Use when running comprehensive project validation including tests, type checking, linting, API connectivity checks, and server startup verification
documentation
Use when investigating a GitHub issue to identify root cause, assess impact, and create a fix strategy document
testing
Use when loading project context and architecture overview before starting implementation work, with optional focus on a specific area