Agent Skills
› regenrek/codex-planr
› planr-summary
planr-summary
GitHub将 .planr 范围内的变更结果转化为面向用户的自然语言摘要,说明变化原因、现状、失效项及阻塞情况。区别于状态报告或审计,专注于基于证据的合成总结,辅助用户理解工作成果与后续步骤。
Trigger Scenarios
用户询问发生了什么变更
用户想知道为什么发生变更
用户询问当前哪些功能可用或不可用
用户查询实施后的剩余阻塞项
Install
npx skills add regenrek/codex-planr --skill planr-summary -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "planr-summary",
"description": "Produce a user-facing recap of an owned `.planr` scope in this repository. Use when the user asks what changed, why it changed, what works now, what intentionally no longer works, or what remains blocked after `planr-fix`, `planr-status`, or `planr-review`. Not for deciding completion (`planr-status`), running a findings-first audit (`planr-review`), or continuing implementation (`planr-fix`)."
}
Planr Summary
Use this skill when the user wants the end result in plain language, not a verdict-only status report or a findings-first audit.
A planr-summary is invalid if it invents outcomes, hides blockers, collapses into planr-status, or turns into a findings list that belongs in planr-review.
CLI-First Rule
- Read ../planr-shared.md first.
- Start with
./.planr/tooling/planr status show [--scope ...]for live scope context before reading raw status JSON. - There is no summary command today. Build the recap from the recorded
.planrevidence, then drop to plan files, diff, and code only when the recorded state is insufficient.
Required Inputs
- the user's summary request
- the live scope entry
- the governing
.planr/plans/*.plan.mdwhen one exists - any explicitly referenced historical source doc still in scope
- the recorded verification commands and results for the scope
Core Rules
- Define an explicit
summary scopebefore writing anything. - Stay read-only by default.
- Summarize only evidence-backed changes and outcomes.
- Distinguish clearly between:
- what changed
- why it changed
- what works now
- what was intentionally removed or no longer works
- what remains blocked or unverified
- Do not turn blocked or unverified items into celebratory success language.
- Do not claim an intentional removal unless the plan, diff, or recorded evidence supports it.
- When a concept was deleted end-to-end, say that plainly; do not summarize it as merely "old values now fail" unless the boundary itself intentionally still exists in the current product shape.
- Do not restate every diff hunk; synthesize the result into user-facing language.
- If completion itself is unclear, say so in the summary and recommend
planr-status. - If correctness, cleanup quality, or architecture placement are in question, recommend
planr-review. - Do not auto-run this skill. Use it only when the user explicitly wants the recap.
Required Workflow
- Start from the user's summary request, not from the whole worktree.
- Define the exact
summary scope:- current scope entry in
.planr/status/current.json - governing plan phases and acceptance criteria when one exists
- owned paths or hunks when known
- excluded dirty paths
- current scope entry in
- Gather the minimum evidence needed:
- checklist and verification state from
.planr/status/current.json - governing plan phase items and
todos - exact verification commands and results
- path-scoped diff or direct file inspection when the recorded summary inputs are stale or incomplete
- checklist and verification state from
- Synthesize the result into the required output sections.
- Choose the smallest honest next step:
nonewhen the summary can simply stand on its ownplanr-fixwhen concrete owned work still remainsplanr-statuswhen the missing question is completion verdict or scope stateplanr-reviewwhen the missing question is correctness, architecture, or hard-cut quality
- Keep the result narrative and user-facing, but still quote exact evidence where it materially supports the summary.
Output Format
Use this structure:
Summary scopeWhat changedWhyWhat works nowWhat intentionally no longer worksWhat remains blocked or unverifiedEvidence checkedRecommended next skillBrief end result
Rules for the response:
What changedshould describe the net result, not a file-by-file changelog.Whyshould explain the purpose of the change in one short paragraph or a few flat bullets.What works nowshould only include evidence-backed outcomes.What intentionally no longer worksshould explicitly saynonewhen nothing was intentionally removed in scope.What remains blocked or unverifiedshould explicitly saynoneonly when that is true.Evidence checkedshould quote exact commands when verification materially supports the recap.Recommended next skillshould be on-demand guidance, not an automatic workflow jump.Brief end resultshould read like the final takeaway a user actually wanted to understand.
Additional Resource
- Read ../planr-shared.md first for shared CLI coverage and shared
.planrrules. - For the full checklist and response template, see reference.md
Version History
- 15aeaf4 Current 2026-07-25 10:11


