Skill page Core v1.0.0

MCAF: Human Review Planning

Apply MCAF human-review-planning guidance for a large AI-generated code drop by reading the target area, tracing the natural user and system flows, identifying the riskiest boundaries, and prioritizing the files a human should inspect first. Use when the codebase is too large to review line-by-line and you need a practical review sequence plus a prioritized file list.

Trigger On

  • a large AI-generated code drop needs a human review plan
  • the reviewer cannot inspect every line and needs prioritization
  • the user asks which files are highest risk before doing manual review
  • the user names a generated folder and wants a saved review plan for it

Workflow

  1. Read enough of the target area and its immediate boundaries to understand the generated code before planning review.
  2. Map the natural flow of operations first:

- sign up or authentication - create - update - register or configure - execute primary business action - complete, archive, or finalize

  1. Use that flow to derive the most efficient human review sequence.
  2. Use the reviewer's domain knowledge as a force multiplier:

- compare the generated code against known architecture and existing entities - look for places where the new feature should behave like nearby existing flows - prioritize boundaries where generated code may drift from established system rules

  1. Identify high-risk review zones:

- entry points and orchestration layers - persistence and state transitions - cross-boundary integrations - permissions, validation, and invariants - side effects such as email, payments, jobs, or notifications

  1. Produce two separate outputs:

- prioritized review flow - prioritized files or modules to inspect

  1. Present both outputs in chat.
  2. If the user asks for a durable artifact, save the plan to the exact docs path they requested; otherwise use docs/AREA/HUMAN_REVIEW_PLAN.md.

Deliver

  • a prioritized human review sequence
  • a prioritized list of files or modules to inspect first
  • both sections presented separately in chat
  • a saved HUMAN_REVIEW_PLAN.md when requested

Validate

  • the plan is grounded in actual code reading, not only the folder names
  • the review order follows actual user or system flows
  • high-risk files are explained, not only listed
  • priorities account for likely mismatch against existing architecture or analogous entities
  • the plan helps a human skip low-value line-by-line review
  • the saved plan is readable without extra chat context

Load References

Related skills

v1.0.0

Design or review .NET solution architecture across modular monoliths, clean architecture, vertical slices, microservices, DDD, CQRS, and cloud-native boundaries without…

dotnet skills install architecture
v1.0.0

Review .NET changes for bugs, regressions, architectural drift, missing tests, incorrect async or disposal behavior, and platform-specific pitfalls before you approve or merge…

dotnet skills install code-review