DEPRECATED — use /plan instead (Pivot/Rescope mode handles this). This skill is kept for reference only.
This skill is deprecated. Use
/planinstead. The Plan skill now includes a Pivot/Rescope mode that handles exactly this case: when work has shipped but the behavior is not what was intended. When the user says "rescope", "this isn't right", or describes a desired behavior change, classify the plan request as Pivot/Rescope mode — the plan skill will dispatch the analyst with current-state focus and optionally a spec-reviewer to surface gaps.
The content below is kept for reference.
Lead documentation: See docs/leads/rescope.md.
Clarifies desired functionality when work has shipped but behavior is not what the user wants. You act as a product manager: take the user's directive, assess current state vs desired state, and produce a clear scope and optional follow-up plan.
You (orchestrator / rescope lead): Acts as product manager. Captures directive, decides assessment needs, synthesizes findings.
Sub-agents (all optional, dispatched based on need):
| Agent | Purpose | Permission | When |
|---|---|---|---|
| explorer | Map current implementation and behavior | read-only | Need to see what exists |
| spec-reviewer | Check if implementation matches intent | read-only | Have task + diff |
| quality-reviewer | Check implementation quality | read-only | Spec is fine; need quality check |
| planner-analyst | Broader codebase context for plan | read-only | Directive implies multi-task plan |
Lead: read-only (clarifies functionality; does not write code or run tg start/done)
Propagation: All sub-agents read-only. No implementer in this skill.
Constraint: Stay in PM role. Do not write code.
Commits: You (the lead) perform any git commits; do not dispatch sub-agents to commit.
flowchart TD
A[User: rescope directive] --> B[Step 1: Capture directive]
B --> C{Step 2: What assessment needed?}
C -->|Current behavior| D[Dispatch explorer]
C -->|Spec compliance| E[Dispatch spec-reviewer]
C -->|Quality check| F[Dispatch quality-reviewer]
C -->|Broader context| G[Dispatch planner-analyst]
C -->|None needed| H[Directive sufficient]
D --> I[Synthesize: current vs gaps]
E --> I
F --> I
G --> I
H --> I
I --> J[Produce rescope document]
J --> K[Present options to user]
From the user's message, extract:
Write a short directive summary (2–4 sentences) that you will use when briefing sub-agents or writing the rescope output.
Choose what you need to know before proposing next steps:
| Need | Sub-agent to use | When |
|---|---|---|
| What code/UX exists and how it behaves | explorer | You need a fast map of implementation and behavior. |
| Whether recent implementation matches spec/intent | spec-reviewer | You have a task + diff and want "does this match intent?" |
| Whether implementation quality is sufficient | quality-reviewer | Spec is fine; you want quality/patterns/tests checked. |
| Broader codebase context before defining tasks | planner-analyst | You need discovery for a plan (e.g. "rescope status dashboard"). |
You may use none (directive is enough to write scope), one, or several in sequence. Do not use implementer or investigator unless the rescope explicitly becomes an investigate/work flow.
mcp_task with subagent_type explore; pass the directive summary and scope anchor..cursor/agents/planner-analyst.md with the user's directive as {{REQUEST}}; dispatch with explore or generalPurpose..cursor/agents/spec-reviewer.md or .cursor/agents/quality-reviewer.md, build prompt with task context + diff, and dispatch. Prefer spec-reviewer first if you care about "does this match intent?".Synthesize sub-agent outputs into: current state, gaps vs directive, ambiguities.
Output a short document following the Output format below.
If you used planner-analyst and have a task list, you can append a Draft tasks section (titles + one-line intents) and suggest importing a plan and running /work or creating a Cursor plan for review.
## Rescope: [Scope anchor or feature name]
### Directive (from you)
[Your 2–4 sentence summary of what the user said the system should do.]
### Current state (assessed)
[What exists and how it behaves today. From codebase knowledge and/or sub-agent reports.]
### Gaps and clarifications
- **Gap 1:** [Desired X; current behavior Y.]
- **Gap 2:** …
- **Clarifications:** [Questions for the user if anything is ambiguous.]
### Recommended next steps
- [ ] [Option A: e.g. "Update plan/tasks for … and run /work."]
- [ ] [Option B: e.g. "Create a small plan: task 1 … task 2 …"]
- [ ] [Option C: e.g. "No code change; document the intended behavior in …."]
tg start/tg done unless the user explicitly asks to execute.