gsd-eval-review

To audit whether a completed AI phase followed its evaluation strategy, you can review the AI-SPEC.md and phase artifacts against the intended evaluation plan. This coverage audit identifies missing tests and weak validation areas to produce a scored remediation plan.

The best way to identify missing test coverage and evaluation gaps after a model phase ships is to conduct a retrospective gap analysis. By comparing completed phase artifacts against the original evaluation planning documentation, you can pinpoint incomplete metrics and weak validation areas that require remediation.

Yes, you need AI-SPEC.md and workflow references to perform an evaluation coverage review. Access to these specification files alongside completed phase artifacts is required to verify whether the intended evaluation strategy was actually implemented and to document the necessary remediation steps.

A remediation plan helps fix quality assurance gaps by summarizing the audit score, verdict, and identified weaknesses into an EVAL-REVIEW.md document. It provides concrete next steps to address missing tests and incomplete metrics found during the retrospective evaluation coverage review.

Yes, you can use a coverage audit for retrospective reviews of phase execution and evaluation planning. By analyzing phase artifacts and quality assurance documentation, the audit confirms whether the evaluation process was comprehensive and documents exactly what must be improved.