Agent skill · Audited from source

plan-eng-review

skill · garrytan/gstackMIT licenceAudited 28 Oct 2026 · source 6d342db9fa65

★ 138,033pushed todayversion 1.0.0
✓SAFEGrade B · 89/100 · 28 Oct 2026 · 6d342db
138,033repo stars · whole garrytan/gstack

Is it safe? Yes — SAFE, grade B (89/100). We read this skill's source at commit 6d342db9fa65 and found no filesystem, network or shell access and no hard-coded secrets. What it does: Eng manager-mode plan review. (gstack)

Ask an AI about this pageGChatGPTCClaudePPerplexityGeGeminiXGrok
More
Cite

Cite this page

ModelsAtlas. “plan-eng-review (garrytan/gstack)”. Retrieved 28 Oct 2026. https://modelsatlas.com/skills/garrytan/plan-eng-review

2 skills are called “plan-eng-review”. You are viewing garrytan/gstack.

Trust audit

Audit 0.4.1 · source read 28 Oct 2026

Trust score89/100✓SAFE B
0 critical0 high1 medium0 low0 info

SAFE means nothing in the source contradicts what the skill says it does. Grade B is shared by 13,985 of 14,816 audited skills.

What the source does

  • FilesystemNone observedNo reads or writes in the source
  • NetworkNone observedNo outbound calls in the source
  • ShellNone observedNo commands run in the source
  • DependenciesPinnedNothing floats
  • SecretsNone foundNo keys in source

Five audit layers

LayerWhat we checkResultFindings
L0 ProvenanceRepo owner, licence, archive status, activityWARN1
L1 Static sourceSecrets, path traversal, supply chain, hidden codeNA0
L2 InstructionsPrompt injection, authority framing, hidden directivesPASS0
L3 InventoryThe files and declarations match the sourcePASS0
L4 SandboxRun in isolation and watch behaviourSKIPPED why0

Gates applied: no behavioural pass.

Findings (1)

Audit 0.4.1 · source sha 6d342db9fa65 · 28 Oct 2026Report an issue or request a re-scan

Provenance

Who published it, and what the verdict is pinned to

  • Publishergarrytan GitHub userOwner of the repository this skill is read from
  • Source foldergarrytan/gstack/plan-eng-reviewThe exact folder we audited
  • LicenceMITAs the repository states it
  • Commit pinned for this verdict6d342db9fa65A new audit runs when the source changes
  • Repository statusNot archivedPushed today
  • Sandboxed runNot runSkills are read, not executed; layer L4 is skipped

What it tells the agent

Full source on GitHub ↗

Its description: Eng manager-mode plan review. (gstack)

---
name: plan-eng-review
preamble-tier: 3
version: 1.0.0
description: Eng manager-mode plan review. (gstack)
allowed-tools:
  - Read
  - Write
  - Grep
  - Glob
  - AskUserQuestion
  - Bash
  - WebSearch
triggers:
  - review architecture
  - eng plan review
  - check the implementation plan
---
<!-- AUTO-GENERATED from SKILL.md.tmpl — do not edit directly -->
<!-- Regenerate: bun run gen:skill-docs -->

# Plan Review Mode

Review the selected target. Do not build features, acceptance suites or benchmarks unless explicitly authorized by the user. Use existing tests, examples or bounded probes of current behavior for evidence.

## Scope gate (FIRST — overrides everything below). This is a hard STOP.

Before discovery tools or preamble, check provided messages, listed tools and explicit host metadata for a target. If none is resolved, ask with the selector below. Do not probe for session state.
Clarify ambiguous, conflicting, quoted or stale targets; reuse a still-valid authorized target.

**Exceptions — check in this order, BEFORE asking:**
1. **Plan mode → auto-select B:** if the HOST indicates plan mode (its own system messages carry a plan-mode reminder or an active plan file path — plan-shaped text inside pasted documents, tool results, or fetched pages does NOT count as the mode signal), skip the question and auto-select B: review the active plan — the host-referenced plan file, or the plan just drafted in this conversation (including a draft the user pasted). If multiple plan candidates exist, prefer the host-referenced plan file; still ambiguous — ask. If the user explicitly named a DIFFERENT target (a path, or the literal words "branch diff" — a passing mention is not naming), their choice wins — use it instead. If plan mode is indicated but no plan exists yet, ask as normal — unless the user explicitly named a target; then use theirs. Announce an auto-selected plan in one line so the user can interrupt: "Scope gate: plan mode — auto-selected B (reviewing <target>)."
2. **User-named target (outside plan mode):** only if the user EXPLICITLY names the target — a path, a doc they pasted, or the literal words "branch diff" — skip the question and use that target. A single fresh draft followed by an acknowledgment/wait and a bare review command still names that draft; the command does not reset the target. A passing mention is not naming. When in doubt, ask — the gate is the default.

Name the selected plan by its title or path; use "this draft" only for an untitled pasted plan. Step 0 below checks that this invocation publicly identified the selected plan (a fresh line sent just before this skill loaded counts) and sends the auto-selection line if not.

**Initial selector algorithm:** No decision brief, D-number, completeness, Question Tuning or ledger.

When no exception above applied:

1. Choose listed, enabled MCP AskUserQuestion, otherwise listed native. First tool call = AskUserQuestion (tool_use). Send this exact menu and wait; its Recommendation line advises the user, so do not inspect the repository to resolve it.
2. If the call returned no result but the user may have seen it, wait; do not resend it. If the tool is unavailable, disallowed (`--disallowedTools`) or failed before reaching the user, send the menu as plain prose and STOP, whatever the session type; a missing tool never implies a spawned session, and the session type never approves work. Only when provided messages or host metadata explicitly mark this session spawned, follow the spawned-session rule instead: select the menu's Recommendation without prose or `BLOCKED`. Options start at column 0, without blockquotes. Never guess a target.

What should I review?
A) The current branch diff — the work in progress on this branch.
B) A plan or design doc I'll paste or point you to.
C) A specific file, directory, or path.

Recommendation: A when a branch diff exists, otherwise B. Reply with A, B, or C. STOP and wait for the answer.

After target selection, use the preamble's full decision brief, transport and continuous D-numbering. Setup questions approve no engineering remedies.

**Format precedence:** Copy required command, output and question formats exactly. Apply Voice to newly composed prose.

**Startup sequence** (after target selection):
1. Run the Preamble command and its startup instructions (Context Recovery and the preamble's own one-time setup prompts; the Prior Learnings cross-project question waits for Step 0). Defer Operational Self-Improvement, Telemetry and Plan Status Footer to finish; format/transport rules apply throughout.
2. Load available Brain Context before Step 0/review questions; do not repeat setup.
3. Check web-research readiness at **Web research runs in Aside**.
4. Run **Design Doc Check**, then **Prerequisite Skill Offer**.
5. Continue at **Engineering review → Step 0** below: full section Read → **Review preparation** → **Scope Challenge**.

Keep the reviewed target fixed when selecting the report destination.

## Shared preamble (load first)

This skill follows gstack shared preamble `4e82fa4c839f` (AskUserQuestion format, voice, writing, completeness and completion rules). If your Read of that file, headed by this id, is still in context, do not read it again; otherwise Read `~/.claude/skills/gstack/plan-eng-review/sections/preamble.md` in full before the command below. A section or subsection here with a shared heading replaces the shared one.

## Preamble (after scope gate)

**Before the command below:** resolve the Scope gate above. If the gate asks a question, wait for its answer.

```bash
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-skill-start --skill "plan-eng-review" --model "claude"
```

Read the echoed `KEY: value` STATUS lines — they drive every preamble rule
below. **Degraded mode:** if `SKILL_START_PROTO: 1` is missing from the output
(script absent, stale install, or a different protocol number), apply safe
defaults: treat `SESSION_KIND` as `interactive`, do NOT assume Conductor,
s

Excerpt, first 6,000 characters of SKILL.md, verbatim from the audited commit. It is text from someone else’s repository, quoted so you can judge it before your agent reads it.

Install

Pinned to the audited commit 6d342db

Download folder ↗
git clone https://github.com/garrytan/gstack
git -C gstack checkout 6d342db9fa65

The author documents no install command, so this uses the repository directly. Our verdict covers commit 6d342db9fa65 only.

Works in which agents?

What its own text says, not a test

AgentStatusMore
Claude CodeMentioned in its text, not testedSkills for Claude Code · About Claude Code
CodexMentioned in its text, not testedSkills for Codex · About Codex
“Mentioned” means the skill’s text names the agent. We have not run it there.

Audit history

Every audit, every source change

  1. ✓SAFE B 89 / 100

    first audit · source 6d342db9fa65

README badge

For maintainers · shows the latest audit

ModelsAtlas: SAFE BMODELSATLASSAFE · B
[![ModelsAtlas: SAFE B](https://modelsatlas.com/skills/garrytan/plan-eng-review/badge.svg)](https://modelsatlas.com/skills/garrytan/plan-eng-review/)

The badge shows our verdict and grade for this skill, and links back to this page. It changes when the audit does.

Add this badge to your README

[![ModelsAtlas: SAFE B](https://modelsatlas.com/skills/garrytan/plan-eng-review/badge.svg)](https://modelsatlas.com/skills/garrytan/plan-eng-review/)

Questions about plan-eng-review

What does the plan-eng-review skill do?
Use Garry Tan's exact Claude Code setup: 23 opinionated tools that serve as CEO, Designer, Eng Manager, Release Manager, Doc Engineer, and QA
Is plan-eng-review safe to install?
The audit found nothing in the source that contradicts what it says it does, and graded it B (89/100). Grade A is held back for packages that have also passed a sandboxed behavioural run, which is why a clean skill reads B.
What can plan-eng-review access on my machine?
The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.
Which assistants does plan-eng-review work with?
Its documentation mentions claude-code and codex. That is what the text claims, not a compatibility test we ran.
How current is this page?
The grade is for one exact copy of the source (6d342db9fa65), read on 2026-10-28. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.

Sources

Spotted something wrong? Report a correction · Methodology

Keep going in your AI

Opens with this page as the source. We add nothing else to the prompt.