sdlc-plan-review

# sdlc-plan-review The last gate before code. Review the active plan with two lenses; finish with one verdict. ## 1. Forensic verification Every claim in the plan is a hypothesis. For each file path, function, line, or behavior the plan asserts — open the real code and confirm it. Classify each: Correct / Partially correct / Incorrect, each backed by a `file:line`. "The plan says X" is not evidence; the file showing X is. ## 2. Adversarial robustness (assume it ships and a bug surfaces in two weeks) - **Caller sites:** for every function/contract the plan changes, grep all callers — are they all handled, or is this a one-site patch with broken siblings? - **Regression risk:** what working behavior could break? Name the test that would catch it, or flag the gap. - **Negative scenarios:** empty/null input, stale/partial state, concurrent/out-of-order, boundary sizes. Which defeat the plan? - **Loopholes:** where can invalid state enter without hitting the new guard (defaults, alternate code paths, deserialization, trust boundaries)? ## 3. Scope & fit Does each step serve the goal? What's over-built (YAGNI)? Does it contradict the project's own rules, conventions, or stated direction? Quote the specific rule if so. ## 4. Strategic & architectural alignment (vision-first projects) If `.sdlc/context/north-star.md` exists, hold the plan to it on two axes: - **Strategy / Non-goals** — does it serve a stated priority? Does any step **advance a declared non-goal** or **contradi...