Agent Skills: Reviewing Implementation Progress

Reviews in-progress implementation against feature specification and plan - provides structured compliance report with categorized issues for fixing. Mid-implementation checkpoint for quality.

reviewID: samjhecht/wrangler/reviewing-implementation-progress

Install this agent skill to your local

pnpm dlx add-skill https://github.com/samjhecht/wrangler/tree/HEAD/.wrangler/memory/knowledge-base/reference-prompts/skills/reviewing-implementation-progress

Skill Files

Browse the full folder contents for reviewing-implementation-progress.

Download Skill

Loading file tree…

.wrangler/memory/knowledge-base/reference-prompts/skills/reviewing-implementation-progress/SKILL.md

Skill Metadata

Name
reviewing-implementation-progress
Description
Tracks implementation progress against specs or plans with completion percentages. Use when monitoring multi-step implementations, reporting status, or identifying blockers.

Reviewing Implementation Progress

Primary Responsibilities

You are provided with:

  • Feature specification
  • Implementation plan with tasks
  • Previously completed task (baseline)
  • In-progress task (current work)

Your job is to review all changes between the previously completed task and the in-progress one. Review the full git diff and explore the codebase to ensure:

  • Implementation adheres to specification and implementation plan
  • Code is high quality, maintainable, follows best practices
  • No obvious bugs, security vulnerabilities, or performance issues
  • Adequate tests cover new functionality and edge cases
  • Tests actually test functionality (not just mocked behavior)
  • Outstanding tasks/steps tracked appropriately

Expected Output

Provide findings in structured JSON report:

{
  "compliant": false,
  "issues": [
    {
      "type": "specification_mismatch",
      "description": "The implementation does not fully adhere to specification. Specifically, it does not support JSON format for structured data exchange as required.",
      "location": {
        "file": "src/cli/index.ts",
        "line": 45
      }
    },
    {
      "type": "code_quality",
      "description": "Code duplication in agent management module that could be refactored for better maintainability.",
      "location": {
        "file": "src/agents/agentManager.ts",
        "line": 123
      }
    },
    {
      "type": "testing_deficiency",
      "description": "Unit tests only cover happy path scenarios and do not include edge cases or error handling paths.",
      "location": {
        "file": "tests/workflowEngine.test.ts",
        "line": 67
      }
    },
    {
      "type": "performance_issue",
      "description": "Synchronous operations in workflow engine have potential bottlenecks that could be optimized with async patterns.",
      "location": {
        "file": "src/workflowEngine/stateMachine.ts",
        "line": 234
      }
    }
  ]
}

Issue Types

specification_mismatch

Implementation doesn't match what specification requires. Critical to fix.

plan_deviation

Implementation differs from plan without justification. May or may not be problematic.

code_quality

Maintainability issues, duplication, unclear naming, poor organization.

testing_deficiency

Missing tests, inadequate coverage, tests that don't actually verify behavior.

security_vulnerability

Potential security issues (injection, XSS, auth bypass, etc.).

performance_issue

Obvious performance problems, inefficient algorithms, resource leaks.

missing_error_handling

Errors not caught or handled properly.

incomplete_implementation

Feature partially implemented, missing parts.

Review Process

1. Read Specification and Plan

  • Understand what should be implemented
  • Note key requirements and acceptance criteria
  • Identify critical constraints

2. Identify Baseline (Previous Task)

  • Find git commit/SHA for previously completed task
  • This is the baseline to compare against

3. Review Current Changes

  • Get git diff from baseline to current state
  • Read all modified files
  • Understand what changed and why

4. Check Against Requirements

For each requirement in spec/plan:

  • Is it implemented?
  • Is it implemented correctly?
  • Are there tests?
  • Do tests actually verify the behavior?

5. Evaluate Code Quality

  • Readability and maintainability
  • Proper error handling
  • Security considerations
  • Performance considerations
  • Test quality

6. Generate Report

  • Set compliant: true only if no issues found
  • Categorize each issue by type
  • Provide specific file:line locations
  • Write clear, actionable descriptions

Integration with Workflows

With executing-plans

Add optional checkpoint between batches:

Execute Task 1
Execute Task 2
Execute Task 3
→ Review progress (this skill)
→ Fix issues if any
→ Continue with Task 4-6

With subagent-driven-development

Review after each task to catch issues early:

Task 1 → Review → Fix → Task 2 → Review → Fix → ...

Use Cases

Mid-Feature Checkpoint

Scenario: Implementing large feature across 10 tasks, currently on task 5 Use: Review tasks 1-5 against spec to ensure on track before continuing

Quality Gate

Scenario: Before marking phase complete, verify all work meets standards Use: Review all changes in phase against requirements

Catching Drift Early

Scenario: Implementation may be diverging from plan Use: Early review catches drift before too much work is done wrong

Important Notes

Only Report Real Issues

  • Don't report style preferences
  • Don't suggest improvements unless actual problems
  • Don't be overly pedantic
  • Focus on things that matter

Be Specific

Bad: "Code quality issues in auth module" Good: "Duplicate password validation logic in auth/login.ts:45 and auth/register.ts:67"

Provide Context

For each issue, explain:

  • What's wrong
  • Why it matters
  • Where it is (file:line)
  • Implicitly, what should be done to fix it (through description)

Compliance Determination

Set compliant: true only when:

  • All spec requirements met
  • All plan tasks completed as described
  • Code quality acceptable
  • Tests adequate and passing
  • No security issues
  • No critical bugs

Set compliant: false when:

  • Any requirement missing
  • Tests inadequate
  • Security concerns
  • Code quality poor
  • Functionality broken

Example Report

{
  "compliant": false,
  "issues": [
    {
      "type": "specification_mismatch",
      "description": "Specification requires rate limiting of 100 req/min for anonymous users. Implementation at src/middleware/rateLimit.ts:23 sets limit to 50 req/min.",
      "location": {
        "file": "src/middleware/rateLimit.ts",
        "line": 23
      }
    },
    {
      "type": "testing_deficiency",
      "description": "No tests verify rate limit enforcement. Tests at tests/middleware/rateLimit.test.ts:15-45 only mock the rate limiter and don't test actual limiting behavior.",
      "location": {
        "file": "tests/middleware/rateLimit.test.ts",
        "line": 15
      }
    }
  ]
}

Related Skills

  • reviewing-code - Comprehensive review framework (use for completed work)
  • executing-plans - Execute plans in batches (integrate reviews between batches)
  • debugging-systematically - Debug issues found in review
  • avoiding-testing-anti-patterns - Avoid common testing mistakes