ferueda

review-spec

Review a spec document against codebase reality, identifying gaps and ensuring sound, robust implementations.

ferueda 2 1 Updated 7mo ago
GitHub

Install

npx skillscat add ferueda/agent-skills/review-spec

Install via the SkillsCat registry.

About this skill

This skill reviews specification documents against the actual codebase to identify gaps, risks, and inconsistencies before coding begins, ensuring implementations are sound and robust. It solves the problem of specs drifting from reality by systematically evaluating architecture, feasibility, security, and edge cases against existing code patterns. Use it when a spec document needs validation before implementation to catch issues early and align proposals with codebase conventions.

SKILL.md

Review the given spec document by analyzing both the spec AND the referenced codebase.

Process

  1. Read the spec - Understand goals, phases, and proposed changes
  2. Explore the codebase - Read files and code mentioned in the spec
  3. Analyze patterns - Identify existing patterns, conventions, and architecture
  4. Validate the plan - Ensure proposals align with codebase reality
  5. Identify issues - Find gaps, risks, and improvement opportunities

Review Dimensions

Evaluate across these areas (focus on what's relevant):

  • Architecture: Component boundaries, data flow, API contracts, separation of concerns
  • Feasibility: Implementation complexity, technology trade-offs, effort estimation
  • Reliability: Error handling, retries, idempotency, graceful degradation
  • Performance: Bottlenecks, caching, query patterns, scaling approach
  • Security: Auth, data protection, input validation, audit logging
  • Edge Cases: Null handling, limits, timeouts, race conditions, partial failures
  • Testing: Testability, integration strategy, rollback considerations

Output Format

For each finding:

### [Finding Title]

**Category**: Architecture | Feasibility | Reliability | Performance | Security | Edge Case | Testing
**Severity**: Critical | High | Medium | Low
**Section**: [Spec section or phase]

**Issue**: [Clear problem description]
**Recommendation**: [Specific, actionable change]
**Rationale**: [Technical justification]

Guidelines

  • Verify against code - Don't trust the spec blindly; check actual implementations
  • Follow existing patterns - Recommendations should align with codebase conventions
  • Be specific - Reference exact files, functions, and line numbers
  • Prioritize - Order findings by severity and impact
  • Challenge assumptions - Question decisions that lack justification