feat(skills): add document-review skill for brainstorm/plan refinement

plugins/compound-engineering/README.md

@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ Core workflow commands use `workflows:` prefix to avoid collisions with built-in
 | `/create-agent-skill` | Create or edit Claude Code skills |
 | `/generate_command` | Generate new slash commands |
 | `/heal-skill` | Fix skill documentation issues |
-| `/plan_review` | Multi-agent plan review in parallel |
+| `/technical_review` | Multi-agent technical/architecture review in parallel |
 | `/report-bug` | Report a bug in the plugin |
 | `/reproduce-bug` | Reproduce bugs using logs and console |
 | `/resolve_parallel` | Resolve TODO comments in parallel |
@@ -125,6 +125,8 @@ Core workflow commands use `workflows:` prefix to avoid collisions with built-in
 
 | Skill | Description |
 |-------|-------------|
+| `brainstorming` | Explore requirements and approaches through collaborative dialogue |
+| `document-review` | Improve documents through structured self-review |
 | `every-style-editor` | Review copy for Every's style guide compliance |
 | `file-todos` | File-based todo tracking system |
 | `git-worktree` | Manage Git worktrees for parallel development |

plugins/compound-engineering/commands/deepen-plan.md

@@ -480,14 +480,14 @@ After writing the enhanced plan, use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to present the
 
 **Options:**
 1. **View diff** - Show what was added/changed
-2. **Run `/plan_review`** - Get feedback from reviewers on enhanced plan
+2. **Run `/technical_review`** - Get feedback from reviewers on enhanced plan
 3. **Start `/workflows:work`** - Begin implementing this enhanced plan
 4. **Deepen further** - Run another round of research on specific sections
 5. **Revert** - Restore original plan (if backup exists)
 
 Based on selection:
 - **View diff** → Run `git diff [plan_path]` or show before/after
-- **`/plan_review`** → Call the /plan_review command with the plan file path
+- **`/technical_review`** → Call the /technical_review command with the plan file path
 - **`/workflows:work`** → Call the /workflows:work command with the plan file path
 - **Deepen further** → Ask which sections need more research, then re-run those agents
 - **Revert** → Restore from git or backup

plugins/compound-engineering/commands/technical_review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+name: technical_review
+description: Have multiple specialized agents review the technical approach and architecture of a plan in parallel
+argument-hint: "[plan file path or plan content]"
+---
+
+Have @agent-dhh-rails-reviewer @agent-kieran-rails-reviewer @agent-code-simplicity-reviewer review the technical approach in this plan in parallel.

plugins/compound-engineering/commands/workflows/brainstorm.md

@@ -85,10 +85,19 @@ Use **AskUserQuestion tool** to present next steps:
 **Question:** "Brainstorm captured. What would you like to do next?"
 
 **Options:**
-1. **Proceed to planning** - Run `/workflows:plan` (will auto-detect this brainstorm)
-2. **Refine design further** - Continue exploring
+1. **Review and refine** - Improve the document through structured self-review
+2. **Proceed to planning** - Run `/workflows:plan` (will auto-detect this brainstorm)
 3. **Done for now** - Return later
 
+**If user selects "Review and refine":**
+
+Load the `document-review` skill and apply it to the brainstorm document.
+
+When document-review returns "Review complete", present next steps:
+
+1. **Move to planning** - Continue to `/workflows:plan` with this document
+2. **Done for now** - Brainstorming complete. To start planning later: `/workflows:plan [document-path]`
+
 ## Output Summary
 
 When complete, display:

plugins/compound-engineering/commands/workflows/plan.md

@@ -498,25 +498,25 @@ After writing the plan file, use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to present these o
 **Options:**
 1. **Open plan in editor** - Open the plan file for review
 2. **Run `/deepen-plan`** - Enhance each section with parallel research agents (best practices, performance, UI)
-3. **Run `/plan_review`** - Get feedback from reviewers (DHH, Kieran, Simplicity)
-4. **Start `/workflows:work`** - Begin implementing this plan locally
-5. **Start `/workflows:work` on remote** - Begin implementing in Claude Code on the web (use `&` to run in background)
-6. **Create Issue** - Create issue in project tracker (GitHub/Linear)
-7. **Simplify** - Reduce detail level
+3. **Run `/technical_review`** - Technical feedback from code-focused reviewers (DHH, Kieran, Simplicity)
+4. **Review and refine** - Improve the document through structured self-review
+5. **Start `/workflows:work`** - Begin implementing this plan locally
+6. **Start `/workflows:work` on remote** - Begin implementing in Claude Code on the web (use `&` to run in background)
+7. **Create Issue** - Create issue in project tracker (GitHub/Linear)
 
 Based on selection:
 - **Open plan in editor** → Run `open docs/plans/<plan_filename>.md` to open the file in the user's default editor
 - **`/deepen-plan`** → Call the /deepen-plan command with the plan file path to enhance with research
-- **`/plan_review`** → Call the /plan_review command with the plan file path
+- **`/technical_review`** → Call the /technical_review command with the plan file path
+- **Review and refine** → Load `document-review` skill.
 - **`/workflows:work`** → Call the /workflows:work command with the plan file path
 - **`/workflows:work` on remote** → Run `/workflows:work docs/plans/<plan_filename>.md &` to start work in background for Claude Code web
 - **Create Issue** → See "Issue Creation" section below
-- **Simplify** → Ask "What should I simplify?" then regenerate simpler version
 - **Other** (automatically provided) → Accept free text for rework or specific changes
 
 **Note:** If running `/workflows:plan` with ultrathink enabled, automatically run `/deepen-plan` after plan creation for maximum depth and grounding.
 
-Loop back to options after Simplify or Other changes until user selects `/workflows:work` or `/plan_review`.
+Loop back to options after Simplify or Other changes until user selects `/workflows:work` or `/technical_review`.
 
 ## Issue Creation
 
@@ -546,6 +546,6 @@ When user selects "Create Issue", detect their project tracker from CLAUDE.md:
 
 5. **After creation:**
    - Display the issue URL
-   - Ask if they want to proceed to `/workflows:work` or `/plan_review`
+   - Ask if they want to proceed to `/workflows:work` or `/technical_review`
 
 NEVER CODE! Just research and write the plan.

plugins/compound-engineering/skills/document-review/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+---
+name: document-review
+description: This skill should be used to refine brainstorm or plan documents before proceeding to the next workflow step. It applies when a brainstorm or plan document exists and the user wants to improve it.
+---
+
+# Document Review
+
+Improve brainstorm or plan documents through structured review.
+
+## Step 1: Get the Document
+
+**If a document path is provided:** Read it, then proceed to Step 2.
+
+**If no document is specified:** Ask which document to review, or look for the most recent brainstorm/plan in `docs/brainstorms/` or `docs/plans/`.
+
+## Step 2: Assess
+
+Read through the document and ask:
+
+- What is unclear?
+- What is unnecessary?
+- What decision is being avoided?
+- What assumptions are unstated?
+- Where could scope accidentally expand?
+
+These questions surface issues. Don't fix yet—just note what you find.
+
+## Step 3: Evaluate
+
+Score the document against these criteria:
+
+| Criterion | What to Check |
+|-----------|---------------|
+| **Clarity** | Problem statement is clear, no vague language ("probably," "consider," "try to") |
+| **Completeness** | Required sections present, constraints stated, open questions flagged |
+| **Specificity** | Concrete enough for next step (brainstorm → can plan, plan → can implement) |
+| **YAGNI** | No hypothetical features, simplest approach chosen |
+
+If invoked within a workflow (after `/workflows:brainstorm` or `/workflows:plan`), also check:
+- **User intent fidelity** — Document reflects what was discussed, assumptions validated
+
+## Step 4: Identify the Critical Improvement
+
+Among everything found in Steps 2-3, does one issue stand out? If something would significantly improve the document's quality, this is the "must address" item. Highlight it prominently.
+
+## Step 5: Make Changes
+
+Present your findings, then:
+
+1. **Auto-fix** minor issues (vague language, formatting) without asking
+2. **Ask approval** before substantive changes (restructuring, removing sections, changing meaning)
+3. **Update** the document inline—no separate files, no metadata sections
+
+### Simplification Guidance
+
+Simplification is purposeful removal of unnecessary complexity, not shortening for its own sake.
+
+**Simplify when:**
+- Content serves hypothetical future needs, not current ones
+- Sections repeat information already covered elsewhere
+- Detail exceeds what's needed to take the next step
+- Abstractions or structure add overhead without clarity
+
+**Don't simplify:**
+- Constraints or edge cases that affect implementation
+- Rationale that explains why alternatives were rejected
+- Open questions that need resolution
+
+## Step 6: Offer Next Action
+
+After changes are complete, ask:
+
+1. **Refine again** - Another review pass
+2. **Review complete** - Document is ready
+
+### Iteration Guidance
+
+After 2 refinement passes, recommend completion—diminishing returns are likely. But if the user wants to continue, allow it.
+
+Return control to the caller (workflow or user) after selection.
+
+## What NOT to Do
+
+- Do not rewrite the entire document
+- Do not add new sections or requirements the user didn't discuss
+- Do not over-engineer or add complexity
+- Do not create separate review files or add metadata sections