gh-coalesce-labs-catalyst-plugins-dev/commands/validate_plan.md

description, category

description	category
Validate that implementation plans were correctly executed	workflow

Validate Plan

You are tasked with validating that an implementation plan was correctly executed, verifying all success criteria and identifying any deviations or issues.

Initial Setup

When invoked:

1. Determine context - Are you in an existing conversation or starting fresh?

   • If existing: Review what was implemented in this session
   • If fresh: Need to discover what was done through git and codebase analysis

2. Locate the plan:

   • If plan path provided, use it
   • Otherwise, search recent commits for plan references or ask user

3. Gather implementation evidence:

   # Check recent commits
   git log --oneline -n 20
   git diff HEAD~N..HEAD  # Where N covers implementation commits
   
   # Run comprehensive checks
   cd $(git rev-parse --show-toplevel) && make check test
   

Validation Process

Step 1: Context Discovery

If starting fresh or need more context:

1. Read the implementation plan completely

2. Identify what should have changed:

   • List all files that should be modified
   • Note all success criteria (automated and manual)
   • Identify key functionality to verify

3. Spawn parallel research tasks to discover implementation:

   Task 1 - Verify database changes:
   Research if migration [N] was added and schema changes match plan.
   Check: migration files, schema version, table structure
   Return: What was implemented vs what plan specified
   
   Task 2 - Verify code changes:
   Find all modified files related to [feature].
   Compare actual changes to plan specifications.
   Return: File-by-file comparison of planned vs actual
   
   Task 3 - Verify test coverage:
   Check if tests were added/modified as specified.
   Run test commands and capture results.
   Return: Test status and any missing coverage
   

Step 2: Systematic Validation

For each phase in the plan:

1. Check completion status:

   • Look for checkmarks in the plan (- [x])
   • Verify the actual code matches claimed completion

2. Run automated verification:

   • Execute each command from "Automated Verification"
   • Document pass/fail status
   • If failures, investigate root cause

3. Assess manual criteria:

   • List what needs manual testing
   • Provide clear steps for user verification

4. Think deeply about edge cases:

   • Were error conditions handled?
   • Are there missing validations?
   • Could the implementation break existing functionality?

Step 3: Generate Validation Report

Before generating report, check context usage:

Create comprehensive validation summary:

# Validation Report: {Feature Name}

**Plan**: `thoughts/shared/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-PROJ-XXXX-feature.md`
**Validated**: {date}
**Validation Status**: {PASS/FAIL/PARTIAL}

## 📊 Context Status
Current usage: {X}% ({Y}K/{Z}K tokens)

{If >60%}:
⚠️ **Context Alert**: Validation consumed {X}% of context.

**Recommendation**: After reviewing this report, clear context before PR creation.

**Why?** PR description generation benefits from fresh context to:
- Synthesize changes clearly
- Write concise summaries
- Avoid accumulated error context

**Next steps**:
1. Review this validation report
2. Address any failures
3. Close this session (clear context)
4. Start fresh for: `/catalyst-dev:commit` and `/describe-pr`

{If <60%}:
✅ Context healthy. Ready for PR creation.

---

{Continue with rest of validation report...}

## Validation Report: [Plan Name]

### Implementation Status

✓ Phase 1: [Name] - Fully implemented ✓ Phase 2: [Name] - Fully implemented ⚠️ Phase 3: [Name] -
Partially implemented (see issues)

### Automated Verification Results

✓ Build passes: `make build` ✓ Tests pass: `make test` ✗ Linting issues: `make lint` (3 warnings)

### Code Review Findings

#### Matches Plan:

- Database migration correctly adds [table]
- API endpoints implement specified methods
- Error handling follows plan

#### Deviations from Plan:

- Used different variable names in [file:line]
- Added extra validation in [file:line] (improvement)

#### Potential Issues:

- Missing index on foreign key could impact performance
- No rollback handling in migration

### Manual Testing Required:

1. UI functionality:
   - [ ] Verify [feature] appears correctly
   - [ ] Test error states with invalid input

2. Integration:
   - [ ] Confirm works with existing [component]
   - [ ] Check performance with large datasets

### Recommendations:

- Address linting warnings before merge
- Consider adding integration test for [scenario]
- Document new API endpoints

Working with Existing Context

If you were part of the implementation:

• Review the conversation history
• Check your todo list for what was completed
• Focus validation on work done in this session
• Be honest about any shortcuts or incomplete items

Important Guidelines

1. Be thorough but practical - Focus on what matters
2. Run all automated checks - Don't skip verification commands
3. Document everything - Both successes and issues
4. Think critically - Question if the implementation truly solves the problem
5. Consider maintenance - Will this be maintainable long-term?

Validation Checklist

Always verify:

• All phases marked complete are actually done
• Automated tests pass
• Code follows existing patterns
• No regressions introduced
• Error handling is robust
• Documentation updated if needed
• Manual test steps are clear

Relationship to Other Commands

Recommended workflow:

1. /catalyst-dev:implement_plan - Execute the implementation
2. /catalyst-dev:commit - Create atomic commits for changes
3. /catalyst-dev:validate_plan - Verify implementation correctness
4. /catalyst-dev:describe_pr - Generate PR description

The validation works best after commits are made, as it can analyze the git history to understand what was implemented.

Remember: Good validation catches issues before they reach production. Be constructive but thorough in identifying gaps or improvements.