Audit requirement quality across change artifacts. This is a requirements linter, not a test runner.
Input: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, infer from context or ask.
Steps
- Load artifacts Load what exists under
specs/changes/<name>/: Also load FRAMEWORK.md for governing principles alignment.
- spec.md, plan.md, tasks.md
- Ask up to 3 clarifying questions (skip if context is clear) Focus on: scope, risk prioritisation, audience, boundary exclusions.
- Generate requirement quality checklists Create or update files in
specs/changes/<name>/checklists/grouped by domain (e.g.,api.md,ux.md,security.md). Each checklist item must: Quality dimensions to cover: ❌ Prohibited: "Verify button clicks", "Test API returns 200" — these are implementation tests. ✅ Required: "Is fallback behavior defined when X fails?", "Can 'fast' be objectively measured?"
- Use question format: "Are [requirement aspect] defined for [scenario]?" - Include a quality dimension tag: [Completeness], [Clarity], [Consistency], [Measurability], [Gap], [Ambiguity], [Conflict] - Reference the source: [Spec §X] or [Plan §X] - Never duplicate existing checklist IDs — continue numbering from the last CHK-N - Completeness — are all scenarios and edge cases specified? - Clarity — are terms unambiguous and objectively measurable? - Consistency — do requirements contradict each other? - Measurability — can success criteria be verified without interpretation? - Coverage — are all user stories traceable to tasks? - Non-functional — are performance, security, and scale requirements present?
- Report Produce a summary:
- Total items by dimension - High-priority gaps - Items that block proceeding to the spec-kit-plan or spec-kit-implement skills
Guardrails
- Never delete existing checklist items — only append.
- Maintain ≥80% traceability across checklist items.
- Flag FRAMEWORK.md principle gaps as CRITICAL.
- This skill audits requirements, not code behavior.