visual-recap

Visual Recap

/visual-recap creates a visual plan built from a diff, not toward one. It is the reverse of forward planning: instead of describing the change you are about to make, you describe the change that was just made, at a higher altitude than line-by-line review. The same plan data model serves both directions — schema, API, file, and architecture changes become the same data-model, api-endpoint, file-tree, and diagram blocks a forward plan would use, only now they summarize work that exists. A reviewer scans the shape of the change before spending attention on the literal lines.

Local-Files Privacy Mode Exception

Use local-files privacy mode when the user explicitly asks for no DB writes, no hosted Plan app, no Plan MCP publish, fully local files, offline/private recaps, or when AGENT_NATIVE_PLANS_MODE=local-files is set. This is the only exception to the hosted publish rule below.

In local-files mode:

• Read the diff/stat/source context from local files and shell commands only. The existing npx @agent-native/core@latest recap collect-diff, scan, and build-prompt --local-files helpers are safe to use because they operate on local files and do not write to the Plan database.
• Write the recap as a local MDX folder under plans/<slug>/: plan.mdx, optional canvas.mdx, optional prototype.mdx, and optional .plan-state.json. Set kind: "recap" and localOnly: true in frontmatter/state when authoring the source.
• Run npx @agent-native/core@latest plan local preview --dir plans/<slug> --kind recap after writing or updating the folder. Report the returned local URL or the /local-plans/<slug> route if the local Plan app is running with the same PLAN_LOCAL_DIR.
• Do not call create-visual-recap, create-visual-plan, import-visual-plan-source, update-visual-plan, patch-visual-plan-source, get-plan-feedback, export-visual-plan, set-resource-visibility, or any hosted Plan tool for that recap.
• Treat review feedback as file or chat feedback: update the MDX files directly, rerun the local preview command, and summarize the new local URL/path. Hosted comments, sharing, screenshots, usage attachment, and PR sticky comment publishing are unavailable until the user explicitly opts into publishing.

Local-files mode prevents recap content from going to the Agent-Native Plan database. It does not by itself make the coding agent's language model local; for that stronger privacy boundary, the host agent/model must also be local or otherwise approved by the user.

Always Publish As An Agent-Native Plan — Never Inline

The deliverable is ALWAYS a published Agent-Native Plan, created with the create-visual-recap tool on the Plan MCP connector. The connector is usually exposed as the plan server, but older installed agents may expose the same hosted connector as agent-native-plans; both names are valid. NEVER hand the recap to the user as inline chat content — not Markdown prose, not an ASCII sketch, not a table, not a fenced "wireframe", not a "here's the recap" summary. A recap's entire value is the hosted, interactive, annotatable plan; an inline summary is not a recap, it is the thing a recap replaces. The only supported output is to publish the plan and return its absolute URL.

Except for the explicit local-files privacy mode above, if neither the plan nor legacy agent-native-plans Plan MCP tools are available, do NOT improvise an inline recap as a fallback. Do not report the connector as disconnected just because it is named agent-native-plans instead of plan. The usual cause is a connector that did not finish connecting this session (it registers zero tools), NOT necessarily an auth problem — so do not assume the user must authenticate. Stop and tell the user how to restore it: reconnect the Plan MCP connector (in Claude Code, run /mcp and reconnect, or restart the session); only if it is genuinely unauthenticated, run npx @agent-native/core@latest connect <plan-app-url> or re-authenticate via /mcp. Then publish once the tool is reachable. Falling back to inline content is a defect, not a degraded mode.

When To Use

Build a recap when a PR or commit is large, multi-file, or touches schema, API contracts, or architecture, and a reviewer would benefit from seeing the change mapped to structured blocks before reading the raw diff. A GitHub Action can generate one automatically from a PR diff; an agent can generate one on request ("recap this PR", "show me what this branch changed"). Skip it for small, single-file, or obvious diffs — a recap is review overhead, and a tiny change reviews faster as plain diff.

Recap The Whole Work Unit

When /visual-recap is invoked in a chat thread after work has already happened, the default scope is the whole current work unit/thread, not only the most recent user message, tool action, or follow-up fix. Gather the thread-owned changes across the conversation: original implementation work, later bug fixes, UI follow-ups, tests, changesets, skill/instruction updates, generated plan/source artifacts, and any local import/linking fixes needed to make the recap open.

Use the current diff plus conversation context to separate thread-owned changes from unrelated dirty work that existed before the thread. Exclude unrelated pre-existing edits. If the scope is genuinely ambiguous and cannot be inferred, state the assumption or ask a concise question before publishing.

When updating an existing recap after feedback, revise the recap so it still covers the whole thread/work unit plus the new correction. Do not replace a broad recap with a narrow recap of only the latest feedback unless the user explicitly asks for that narrower scope.

Keep The Recap Body Lean

Do not add boilerplate intro, disclaimer, provenance, or summary prose blocks to the generated plan body. In particular, do not create a rich-text block just to say the recap is an aid, that the reviewer should still review the diff, how many files changed, or which ref/working tree generated the recap. The plan title, brief, and file-tree (which carries the per-file change stats) already carry that context.

Only add prose blocks when they tell the reviewer something specific about the change that the structured blocks do not: the objective, a real compatibility risk, an important decision visible in the diff, or a grounded review note.

Recaps Must Be Substantial

Lean is not the same as thin. A recap is not a single wireframe plus one sentence — that under-serves the reviewer as much as boilerplate prose over-serves them. Alongside the visual/structural headline (wireframes, data-model, api-endpoint, diagram), a substantial recap also carries the implementation evidence:

• A short surface/state inventory before authoring: list the changed routes, components, popovers/dialogs, role/access states, empty/error states, and shared abstractions visible in the diff. The final recap must either represent each meaningful item with a block or intentionally omit it because it is tiny, redundant, or not user-visible.
• A file-tree of the changed files with each entry's change flag, so the reviewer sees the footprint of the work at a glance.
• The split diff of the KEY changed files, grouped under a ## Key changes rich-text heading in a single horizontal tabs block (the default orientation, one file per tab), with a one-line summary and a few annotations on each — so the reviewer can drop from the high-altitude shape straight into the load-bearing code. Use horizontal file tabs, not a vertical side rail, so the selected file has enough width for the side-by-side diff.

Skip the diff appendix only for a genuinely tiny change that reviews faster as plain diff (see "When To Use"); for any change worth recapping, the file-tree and key-change diffs belong in the plan.

Canonical Shape And Budgets

A strong recap follows one skeleton, top to bottom:

1. UI-impact headline — wireframes first, when the diff changed rendered UI.
2. Short outcome narrative (rich-text): what changed and why, 1-3 paragraphs.
3. data-model / api-endpoint blocks for schema and contract changes.
4. file-tree of the changed files with change flags.
5. ## Key changes — one horizontal tabs block of diff / annotated-code.

Budgets that keep the recap reviewable:

• 3-8 key-change tabs. Fewer than 3 on a large change under-serves the reviewer; more than 8 stops being a summary.
• Keep each diff/annotated-code excerpt focused — prefer under ~150 lines per tab; summarize or link the rest of a long file instead of dumping it.
• Title at most ~70 characters; brief 1-3 sentences.

GOOD. A 25-file auth change: Before/After wireframes of the login surface, a two-paragraph narrative, a diff-aware data-model of the sessions table, an api-endpoint for the new refresh route, a file-tree with change flags, and ## Key changes with five focused tabs, each with a one-line summary and a few annotations on the load-bearing hunks.

BAD. One giant unsegmented diff dump with no summaries or annotations; or a sparse three-block recap of a 40-file change (one wireframe, one sentence, one file list) that forces the reviewer back into the raw diff anyway.

UI Impact Needs Wireframes

When the diff changes rendered UI, layout, density, visual state, interaction affordances, navigation, controls, menus, dialogs, or design tokens, the recap MUST include one or more wireframes. Prose and file diffs are not a substitute for showing what changed visually.

Before choosing wireframes, make a UI coverage pass from the diff:

• Identify the entry surface where the change appears, such as a page header, list row, toolbar, route shell, or menu trigger.
• Identify the interaction surface that opens or changes, such as a popover, dialog, tab, sheet, dropdown, inline editor, or toast.
• Identify the resulting destination or persistent state, such as a public page, read-only view, empty state, error state, loading state, permission-denied state, or saved/shared state.
• Identify access or role variants when permissions change. Owner/admin/editor versus viewer/non-manager differences are visual behavior and need a compact matrix, paired wireframes, or clearly labeled state sequence.

For UI-heavy PRs, a single before/after of the entry surface is not enough. Show the changed entry point, the main changed interaction surface, and the resulting/destination state. Add more states when the diff adds tabs, role-based controls, public/private visibility, invite/manage flows, destructive controls, or empty/error branches.

Choose the smallest visual surface that makes the review clear:

• Use a Before / After wireframe pair when the reviewer benefits from direct comparison, such as a removed or added control, a changed state, layout density, ordering, navigation, or a visible component replacement. references/wireframe.md owns how to lay that pair out (columns vs. vertical stack by geometry).
• Use an after-only wireframe when the change is purely additive or the "before" state would only show absence without adding review value.
• Use more than two wireframes when the UI change is flow-dependent, responsive, or stateful; show the meaningful states in order instead of forcing a single before/after pair.
• For tiny surfaces like menus, popovers, dialogs, toasts, or panels, use the matching surface (popover, panel, etc.) and show the focused sub-surface. Do not redraw a full page unless placement in the page is itself part of the change.

Ground each wireframe in the changed UI behavior, component names, file paths, and diff-visible labels/states. If exact pixels are inferred rather than captured, say so in the wireframe caption or a concise annotation. For local/manual recaps, import or update the plan source that holds the wireframes so the rendered recap opens with the UI visual available.

Wireframe Quality — read references/wireframe.md

UI recap/plan wireframes must meet a strict quality bar — full-width chrome, pinned bottom bars, real product content, before/after comparability, the right surface preset, --wf-* tokens instead of hex, and no <html>/<style>/font tags. Before authoring ANY wireframe / <Screen> / WireframeBlock, READ references/wireframe.md in this skill directory — it is the single source of truth for HTML wireframe quality, shared word for word with /visual-plan and /visual-recap. Do not author wireframes from memory.

Use the standard WireframeBlock / <Screen> format so the Plan viewer owns the surface frame, theme, and sketchy/clean toggle. HTML wireframes are appropriate when placement precision matters, especially popovers, menus, dialogs, and dense forms. For HTML wireframes, keep renderMode unset or wireframe unless a design-only editable mockup is explicitly required, because renderMode="design" disables the sketchy rough overlay.

When a browser tool is available, render a UI-impact recap in the Plan viewer and visually inspect it at the current theme before sharing. If any label, annotation, toolbar, or wireframe content overlaps another element, fix the MDX and re-import before reporting the link. A text-match screenshot is not enough; visually inspect the captured image. When no browser is available (for example a headless CI agent), state that in the recap handoff instead.

Open And Report The Recap

In local-files privacy mode, report the local preview URL/path from npx @agent-native/core@latest plan local preview or the /local-plans/<slug> route for a local Plan app using the same PLAN_LOCAL_DIR. Do not invent a hosted URL and do not publish just to get an absolute Plan link.

After creating the recap, link the reviewer to the rendered plan with an absolute URL on the origin whose database actually holds the plan. That origin is the Plan MCP server you just created the recap through — NOT whatever dev server you happen to know is running. The create tool returns the correct link; report THAT. Never make the primary link a local plan.mdx file, a local mirror folder, or a relative path such as /plans/<id>.

A recap lives only in the database of the MCP that created it. A separately running local dev server (e.g. http://localhost:8081) has its OWN database and will NOT contain a recap created through the hosted MCP, so a hand-built localhost link returns "Plan not found". This is the most common recap mistake — do not guess an origin you have not confirmed shares the MCP's data.

Resolve the URL in this order:

1. Use the absolute URL the create tool RETURNS — openLink.webUrl, else the visualUrl in the returned plan.mdx frontmatter, else url/path resolved against the MCP server's own origin (for the hosted MCP that is https://plan.agent-native.com). This always points at the database that has the plan.
2. Use a localhost/dev origin ONLY when the recap was created through a Plan MCP bound to that same origin — i.e. that MCP's url is http://localhost:<port>/_agent-native/mcp. Creating through the hosted MCP and linking to localhost is the exact mismatch that 404s.
3. If only a plan id is available, build the MCP origin's absolute URL (hosted: https://plan.agent-native.com/plans/<id>) and say it was inferred.

If the user wants to review on localhost but the recap was created through the hosted MCP, say so plainly: the local dev server cannot see it. To view a recap on localhost (e.g. to exercise un-deployed local renderer changes), they must connect a LOCAL Plan MCP (http://localhost:<port>/_agent-native/mcp) and re-create the recap through it so it lands in the local database; offer to do that rather than handing over a localhost URL that will not resolve.

When running in Codex and the Browser/in-app side browser tools are available, open the returned absolute recap URL there automatically after creation. Still include the same absolute URL in the final response. Local mirror files like plans/<slug>/plan.mdx may be mentioned only as secondary source-control artifacts, not as the main way to open the recap.

Diff → Block Mapping

Map each kind of change to the block that carries it, derived mechanically from the actual diff. The names below are the CONCEPTUAL block types, not the JSX tags — resolve every conceptual name to its exact tag + prop schema with the get-plan-blocks tool (see "Block reference" below) before authoring.

• Schema / migration change → data-model for the resulting entities, fields, and relations. Flag what moved per field/entity with change: "added" | "modified" | "removed" | "renamed", and for a changed type set was to the prior value (e.g. the old column type) — grounded in the real migration diff. That diff-aware data-model is the headline; reach for a split diff of the literal SQL only when the exact statement still matters, not by default.
• API / action / route change → api-endpoint with the method, path, params, request, and responses as they are after the change. Flag each changed param/response with change (and was on a param whose type/shape changed), and set change on the endpoint root for a wholly added or removed route. Mark removed endpoints with deprecated: true and explain in prose. Keep multiple API endpoints in the normal single-column document flow unless they are an explicit before/after contract comparison. Author each request/response example as a SINGLE valid JSON value — one top-level object or array, parseable on its own — so it renders in the collapsible JSON explorer. Do not put // or /* */ comments, prose, trailing commas, or two or more concatenated top-level objects inside one example; a non-parseable body falls back to flat text and loses the explorer. When an endpoint has several distinct message shapes (for example separate websocket frame types, or a success body versus an error body), give each its OWN example with its own label rather than cramming them into one body.
• Compatibility-sensitive change → short rich-text notes beside the relevant data-model / api-endpoint block. Name the changed field, endpoint, or behavior and mark whether it is breaking, risky, or non-breaking; pair that note with a split diff for the literal lines.
• Any meaningful code hunk → diff with mode: "split", carrying the real before / after text and the filename / language. Split mode is the default for recap code review because before/after legibility is the point; use mode: "unified" only for a genuinely narrow standalone hunk where side-by-side would hide the code. Give every diff a one-line summary saying what the hunk changes and why; it renders as a description above the code so the reviewer reads intent first. Never leave a diff unlabeled. For the KEY changed files, attach annotations to the diff so the recap calls out what each important hunk does — this is the headline affordance for annotating the key files updated. Each annotation anchors to the AFTER-side line numbers by default (set side: "before" to point at removed lines). Keep it to a few high-signal notes per file, not one per line. When several key files each need a substantial diff, introduce the group with a rich-text heading block whose markdown is ## Key changes, then place the diff blocks under it in a reusable tabs block with horizontal orientation (the default — omit orientation) so the selected file's split diff gets the full document width. Let that heading label the section — do NOT also set a title on the tabs block. Keep each tab label to the file path or a short basename plus directory hint. If the recap ends with more than one supporting diff, that trailing diff appendix should be one horizontal tabs block under its own ## Key changes heading, not a stack of separate diff blocks.
• Brand-new file or a substantial added block with no meaningful "before" → annotated-code rather than a one-sided split diff. Carry the real new code with its filename / language and anchor a few high-signal notes to the lines that matter so the reviewer reads what the new code does, not code for code's sake. Keep split diff for true before/after hunks where the removed lines still carry meaning, and group several annotated walkthroughs in a horizontal tabs block the same way diffs are grouped.
• Files added / removed / renamed → file-tree with each entry's change flag (added, removed, modified, renamed) and a short note; attach a snippet only when one tells the reviewer something the path does not.
• Rendered UI / interaction change → one or more wireframes showing the visible UI delta before the reviewer reads code. Use Before / After wireframes when the comparison clarifies the change; otherwise use after-only or a short state/flow sequence. Use realistic UI surfaces: for a popover change, show a popover with its title row, top-right actions, options/fields, tabs, selected/disabled states, people/lists/rows, and any opened prompt/menu anchored to the correct trigger. If a route was added, show the route body and the unavailable/empty state when the diff implements one. If permissions changed, show what managers can do and what viewers/non-managers see instead. Keep the body lean: the wireframe carries the UI story, while the file tree and diff blocks carry implementation evidence.
• Architecture or data-flow shift → diagram with data.html / data.css as a two-panel before/after, layered, or swimlane layout, or mermaid for a quick graph. Use two-dimensional layouts; do not reduce a structural change to a left-to-right chain. Do not use diagram as a stand-in for rendered UI controls; UI changes need wireframe blocks. Author diagram HTML/CSS with the renderer-owned .diagram-* primitives (.diagram-panel, .diagram-node, .diagram-pill, [data-rough], …) and the same --wf-* theme tokens references/wireframe.md defines — never font-family, hex, rgb/hsl literals, or one-off dark/light palettes.
• Outcome-first narrative → rich-text for the "what changed and why" prose: the objective the diff served, the key decisions visible in it, and the risks a reviewer should weigh. This is the only place the model writes freely.

Block reference — call get-plan-blocks, do not memorize tags

The conceptual block names above (api-endpoint, data-model, json-explorer, tabs, …) are NOT the JSX tags you author with, and the exact tags, required fields, and prop shapes change as the block library evolves. Do not author from memorized tags — they drift and silently produce a wrong tag (ApiEndpoint instead of Endpoint, JsonExplorer instead of Json, Tabs instead of TabsBlock) that errors on import.

Before writing any structured plan content, call get-plan-blocks on the Plan MCP connector (plan or legacy agent-native-plans). It returns the authoritative, always-current block vocabulary generated live from the app's own block registry — the same config the renderer and MDX round-trip use — so it can never be stale even if this SKILL.md is an old installed copy:

• get-plan-blocks (default format: "reference") → a compact table of every block's runtime type, exact MDX <Tag>, placement, and key data fields. This is your map from each conceptual name above to its real tag and props.
• get-plan-blocks with format: "schema" → the full per-block JSON Schema plus a worked example for each block, when you need exact field types, enums, or nesting (e.g. Diff.annotations, Endpoint.params[].in, DataModel.entities[].fields[]).

Author the recap source against the tags and schemas that call returns. The complete set of valid block-level tags is whatever get-plan-blocks lists; any other capitalized tag at the block level is rejected on import with an "Unknown plan block" / "did you mean" error. Lowercase HTML tags inside rich-text/markdown prose (<div>, <span>, <code>, <br>, …) are always fine — only capitalized component-style block tags are validated.

A few recap-specific authoring rules the registry table cannot encode:

• Every block takes a REQUIRED id (unique across the whole plan) plus the shared optional summary / editable envelope; give a block a heading by placing a rich-text block with a Markdown ### heading directly above it (blocks no longer take a title).
• Endpoint: prose description is the MDX children (body between the tags), not an attribute; for a WebSocket upgrade use method="GET". Each request/response example is a JSON string (the renderer parses it into the JSON explorer), so keep it a single parseable JSON value.
• TabsBlock: the whole tabs array (including nested child blocks) is ONE JSON tabs={[…]} prop — there is NO nested <Tab> element.
• WireframeBlock: its body is a single <Screen surface ... html=… /> subtree (nested MDX, not a flat prop); html must be a single-quoted string or static template literal, never a dynamic html={someVar} expression. See references/wireframe.md for the HTML rules.
• Diagram: the whole payload is one data={{ html?, css?, nodes?, edges?, … }} attribute and requires either html or at least one node; Mermaid is its own separate block (source text), not a Diagram prop.

Before / After Is The Headline

The recap's center of gravity is the before/after comparison. For document-body comparisons there are two primitives, and they cover the whole need together:

• columns — the side-by-side container, for structured comparisons. Use two columns labeled Before and After, each holding a block (commonly a data-model, api-endpoint, or rich-text), so the reviewer reads the old shape against the new shape in one glance. This is the right primitive for "the schema went from X to Y" or "the endpoint contract changed like this." Do not use columns simply to compact or group a list of API endpoints.
• diff — for code. It renders the literal removed and added lines. Use it for the actual hunks. Use split mode by default for recap code review; reserve mode: "unified" for genuinely narrow standalone hunks where side-by-side would hide the code. Key-file diff groups should use horizontal tabs so split diffs get the full document width.

For UI diffs, wireframes are the visual comparison primitive. Use before/after wireframes when the comparison clarifies the change; use after-only or a state sequence when that better matches the change. The visual headline must show exact placement, realistic chrome, and adequate padding before any abstract explanation. Do not stop at the first visible affordance when the diff adds a flow; show the entry point, the opened surface, and the resulting state or page so the reviewer can trace the actual user path. references/wireframe.md owns the before/after layout choice — the columns renderer keeps narrow surfaces side by side and auto-stacks wide desktop/browser frames vertically; never hand-build a side-by-side wireframe layout in custom-html. For document-body comparisons, there is no other multi-column primitive — columns plus the diff block are the whole comparison vocabulary. Do not hand-build side-by-side layouts in custom-html, and do not stack two data-model blocks vertically and call it a comparison when columns exists to put them side by side.

Grounding Rule

Structured blocks are true by construction only if they are derived from the actual changed lines. The diff, data-model, api-endpoint, and file-tree blocks MUST be built mechanically from the real diff — real paths, real fields, real method/path, real before/after text — never inferred, rounded, or invented. The model writes only the prose: the "why", the narrative, the risk read. A confidently wrong recap is dangerous in a review context, because a reviewer who trusts the summary may skip the very line the summary got wrong. When the diff does not contain a fact, leave it out rather than guess; mark anything the model inferred (not extracted) as inferred in prose.

Security

• Gate visibility. Recaps of a private repo are org/login-gated — set the plan's visibility to the owning org or login, never auto-public. A recap can expose unreleased schema, internal endpoints, and architecture; treat it like the source it summarizes.
• Never transcribe secrets. A diff can contain API keys, tokens, webhook URLs, signing secrets, .env values, or credential-looking literals. Do not copy any of these into a diff, file-tree snippet, api-endpoint, or prose block — redact them (sk-•••, <redacted>). This mirrors the repo's hardcoded-secret rule: obviously fake placeholders only, never the real value, in any block, caption, or note.

Bidirectional Loop

Because a recap is a real, editable plan, the same review loop as forward plans applies: a reviewer can annotate any block, and the coding agent reads get-plan-feedback to drive fixes back into the code — annotation → agent → diff, the same close-the-loop flow forward plans use. After a reviewer annotates a block, call get-plan-feedback to read the structured feedback, then either update the recap with create-visual-recap (passing the existing planId to replace it in place) or apply targeted changes with update-visual-plan. The loop is live and wired. The one thing not yet automatic is PR-comment-triggered re-runs: the GitHub Action creates an initial recap per PR, but it does not yet re-run automatically when new review feedback is posted in GitHub — that auto-re-run is the remaining fast-follow.

Related Skills

• visual-plan — the canonical command and the source of the shared Wireframe & Canvas and Document Quality cores; a recap follows the same block discipline in reverse.
• comment anchors — recap comments use the same anchor rules as forward plans; see "Interpreting comment anchors" in the visual-plan skill for coordinate frames, wireframe node ids, text-quote resolution, detached threads, routing via resolutionTarget, and two-axis consumed/resolved state.
• security — data scoping, secret handling, and the hardcoded-secret rule the recap's redaction and visibility gating mirror.
• sharing — org/login-gated visibility for the plan that holds the recap.