loop-grill

Surface underspecified acceptance criteria and scope gaps in GitHub issues and plan files.

14|1|Updated May 13, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/mfittko/dev-loops --skill loop-grill
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: loop-grill
Source: https://github.com/mfittko/dev-loops/tree/main/.claude/skills/loop-grill
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/mfittko/dev-loops --skill loop-grill

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Dev loops often stall or require rework when GitHub issues or local plan files lack clear acceptance criteria, defined scope boundaries, identified primary actors, or documentation of irreversible decisions. This Skill surfaces these underspecified gaps before implementation begins, reducing wasted effort and rework.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Dual input support: Run gap checks on GitHub issues (tracker-first) or local plan files (local-planning) to match your workflow.
  • Flexible gap resolution: Choose interactive Socratic Q&A for human-led clarification, or auto-answer mode that pulls evidence from your codebase, docs, and repository context to resolve gaps without prompting.
  • Idempotent write-back: Writes structured findings directly back to the source artifact, with guards to avoid duplicate sections on re-runs.
  • Use Case: You have a GitHub issue for a new payment processing feature with no acceptance criteria. Run loop-grill to surface the missing criteria, get clarifying answers, and write findings back to the issue before starting the dev loop.

Quick Start

Use the loop-grill skill to run a pre-loop gap check on GitHub issue 42 or your local feature plan file.

Frequently Asked Questions about loop-grill

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I find missing acceptance criteria in GitHub issues before starting development?

Pre-loop gap detection surfaces missing acceptance criteria in GitHub issues before development starts. It analyzes issue text to identify fuzzy scope boundaries, unresolved primary actors, and undocumented irreversible decisions to prevent wasted effort.

What is the best way to audit local plan files for underspecified scope boundaries?

Auditing local plan files for underspecified scope boundaries involves checking for unresolved primary actors and undocumented hard-to-reverse decisions. This pre-loop review process highlights gaps in feature plans to reduce implementation rework.

Can I automatically resolve spec gaps using my codebase context instead of manual clarification?

Auto-answer mode resolves spec gaps automatically by pulling evidence from your codebase, project documentation, and repository context. This bypasses interactive Socratic Q&A to provide gap resolution without manual human prompting.

How does Socratic Q&A work for clarifying undocumented irreversible decisions in feature plans?

Socratic Q&A for clarifying undocumented irreversible decisions uses interactive questioning to guide human-led clarification. It prompts the user to resolve underspecified criteria and scope boundaries found during the plan validation process.

Does writing grill findings back to GitHub issues create duplicate sections on re-runs?

Writing grill findings back to GitHub issues uses replace-section semantics to ensure idempotent re-runs. This structured write-back approach includes guards that prevent duplicate sections when gap checks are executed multiple times.

When do I need plan validation for a development loop?

Plan validation for a development loop is needed when GitHub issues or local plan files lack clear acceptance criteria, defined scope boundaries, or identified primary actors. Running pre-loop reviews prevents dev loops from stalling.