fullstorydev/subtext/subtext-review

Claude Code and agent skill by fullstorydev/subtext

Trust tier 2
  • community
LLM review pending
Source check pending

Checking that the SKILL.md file is still in the repository.

Review a completed Subtext session and produce a structured summary. Use when you have a session URL and want to understand what happened — verify a flow, walk through a dev / staging / preview session, or summarize a captured session. Optionally emits reproduction steps on request.

Install

npx vskill@latest install fullstorydev/subtext/subtext-review

SKILL.md

Review

PREREQUISITE: Read subtext-shared and subtext-session for tool conventions.

Type: Workflow — goal-oriented with decision logic.

Review a completed session and produce a structured summary of what happened. Optionally emit reproduction steps when the user asks. Review is read-only analysis.

When to use

Use when:

  • The user provides a session URL and wants to know what happened.
  • The user asks for a walkthrough, summary, or diagnosis of a session.
  • Session source is any of: local dev, staging, preview, production.

Skip when:

  • The user wants the repro executed, not just described — that needs a live browser (the separate Subtext Verify plugin).

The loop

Step 1: Open the session

Call review-open with whichever identifier you have — see subtext-session for the six accepted forms. Capture the client_id from the response, and read the map it returns — signal counts by kind/tag and page flow. Don't call review-zoom yet.

Step 2: Form hypotheses from the map

The map is the orientation layer. Before zooming, ask: does anything in kinds/tags stand out (an error: count, an unusually dense phase)? Form one or two hypotheses about what happened — that's what you zoom to confirm.

Step 3: Zoom to confirm — as recipes, coarse to fine

Use review-zoom with a resolution map. Treat resolutions as recipes, not parameters to memorize:

  • Errors anywhere → resolution={ error: "standard" }
  • What happened overall → resolution={ navigation: "standard", interaction: "standard" }
  • Devtool-level detail on a suspect window → resolution={ network: "machine", console: "machine" }, narrowed with t0_ms/t1_ms

Start coarse (standard, the default) and only reach for machine/detail on the specific kind or tag your hypothesis needs — each step down costs more tokens for more fidelity. Judge coverage against the map from review-open (its kinds/tags counts); review-zoom returns the signal slice.

When you need to see the screen itself — confirm a layout, grab a component tree — use review-snapshot at the timestamp in question. It's a separate data set from signals; don't expect it to carry network/console detail.

Don't sweep the entire session frame-by-frame — that's expensive and usually unnecessary. Lead with the map and the errors it surfaces.

Step 4: Assess

Form a judgment on:

  • What the session was trying to accomplish — inferable from behavior.
  • Did it succeed — any errors? Did the final state match the apparent intent?
  • Notable moments — anything surprising, confusing, or worth flagging to the user.
Step 5: Produce the structured summary

Output in this shape — stable sections make the result easy to consume, especially for a downstream agent:

markdown
## Session Summary
**Session:** <URL>
**Type:** <dev | staging | preview | production>
**Duration:** <if available>
### What happened
<One-paragraph narrative of what the user/agent tried to do.>
### Errors
<Timestamped list with context, or: "None observed.">
### Key moments
-`<timestamp>` — <inflection point>
### Assessment
<One paragraph. Did the session achieve its apparent goal? Anything the next reader should know?>
Step 6: Reproduction steps — only if asked

If the user explicitly asks to reproduce, append a structured step list. Do not execute — this plugin is read-only. Executing a repro requires driving a live browser, which lives in the separate Subtext Verify plugin.

markdown
### Reproduction steps
1.Navigate to <URL>
2.<action> — e.g., "Click the 'Sign in' button"
3.<observation to confirm> — e.g., "Verify modal appears within 2s"

Write the steps as deterministic actions: concrete selectors, URLs, and assertions. Avoid subjective instructions ("look around").

Decision logic

Errors present

Always lead with errors. A downstream reader — human or agent — will look for this section first.

Repro steps requested
  • "reproduce", "repro", "walk me through step by step", "how do I hit this" → produce the step list in Step 6.
  • "review", "summarize", "what happened" → stop at Step 5. Don't volunteer repro steps; they add length without being asked for.

Security

  • Security scanPassed, 100 of 100Pattern checks on the skill's files.
  • Model reviewNot runA model review is scheduled for the next rescan.

Quality evaluation

  • Task evaluationNot runNo evaluation yet. Run one in Skill Studio.

Source

Popularity

Repository stars
79
Repository forks
3
7-day trend score
0

Stars and forks are for the whole GitHub repository, not this skill alone. Not refreshed yet.

Works with

Any agent vskill installs to: 56 targets in all. These 39 have a page on this site.

  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • GitHub Copilot
  • Windsurf
  • Codex
  • Gemini CLI
  • Cline
  • Amp
  • Roo Code
  • Goose
  • Continue
  • Kilo Code
  • Junie
  • Trae
  • OpenHands
  • Qwen Code
  • AI Agent
  • Tabnine Chat
  • Sourcegraph Cody
  • Amazon Q
  • Firebase Genkit
  • Sweep
  • Devin
  • Phind
  • Mentat
  • Claude Desktop
  • Aider
  • GPT Pilot
  • Plandex
  • bolt.new
  • v0
  • Replit Agent
  • Anse
  • TypingMind
  • BetterChatGPT
  • LibreChat
  • Warp AI
  • Pieces
  • Fig AI
Embed badge
vskill VERIFIED badge
[![vskill VERIFIED](https://verified-skill.com/api/v1/skills/fullstorydev/subtext/subtext-review/badge)](https://verified-skill.com/skills/fullstorydev/subtext/subtext-review)

Something wrong with this skill or its page? Tell us.