Individual skill
review-thread
Review task progress, goal alignment, agent-time ETA, and worthwhile parallel work. Use when the user invokes /review-thread or requests a progress or scope assessment.
review-thread/SKILL.md
Source commit 1acf58f08cca24b764a4352a6c30fed1f7fb9fb6
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- No
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- Yes
- Observed behavior
- Not checked yet
- Last checked
- Nov 7, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 198
- Repository last updated
- Nov 9, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- engineering Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 2,811 bytes
Read excerpt
# Review thread
Give a concise, candid assessment of progress toward the user's intended outcome. Keep reporting lightweight and continue authorized work.
## 1. Progress and direction
Infer what success means to the user; state consequential assumptions. Explain what now works, what remains, and what is verified. Distinguish implementation, passing tests, and actual user-visible success.
Assess whether we are fixing the right problem:
- What can we remove without weakening the outcome?
- What must we add to fully satisfy the use case?
Use independent judgment: do not invent scope problems to agree with the user. Recommend concrete corrections when warranted, and correct earlier claims plainly. Report outcomes rather than tool-call chronology.
