gen-specs-as-issues

Compare documented capabilities in the README and docs against the actual implementation, looking for placeholder code and unimplemented entry points. This workflow walks through project understanding, gap analysis, and produces a list of 5-7 candidate missing features.

Score each gap on user impact, strategic alignment, implementation feasibility, resource requirements, and risk on a 1-5 scale. Priority is computed as (User Impact × Strategic Alignment) / (Implementation Effort × Risk Level), surfacing the top 3 features.

Include an overview, explicit scope boundaries, technical requirements, an implementation plan with code examples, acceptance criteria, priority justification, and dependency relationships. The workflow also adds effort estimates and sub-issue breakdowns of 1-3 days of work.

Yes, it performs independence analysis and dependency mapping, creating parent issues with sub-issues for interdependent components. It documents blocked-by and blocks relationships using GitHub issue linking syntax and labels.

It is less suited for greenfield projects with no existing documentation or code to analyze, since gap analysis requires documented capabilities to compare against. It also focuses on core functionality rather than nice-to-have enhancements.