◇ Could this help me?
Yes, with the cost and review caveats made explicit. Chaining plan, execute against a stated goal, and review is a sound structure, and separating the review pass from the writing pass genuinely catches things the writing session was blind to. The parts to handle carefully are the ones the video treats casually: a loop described as capable of running for days is an unbounded token spend, and an automated review is not a substitute for reading the diff before it ships. This is a general practice.
I want to run a large change as a plan, execute, review sequence. First produce a detailed implementation plan for the task I describe, and stop for my approval. Then work against that plan toward a goal I state, with an explicit stopping condition, a maximum number of turns, and a checkpoint back to me if the goal is not met by then. Finally, run a separate review pass over everything produced, looking specifically for requirements silently skipped, missing error handling, and security issues, and give me the findings as a list rather than applying them.