pbs-spec-lean

Guides spec-driven feature development through plan, checks, build, and independent verification phases.

Updated Sep 15, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/Peterson-Benhame/agent-skills --skill pbs-spec-lean-peterson-benhame
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: pbs-spec-lean
Source: https://github.com/Peterson-Benhame/agent-skills/tree/main/packages/skills-catalog/skills/%28development%29/pbs-spec-lean
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Peterson-Benhame/agent-skills --skill pbs-spec-lean-peterson-benhame

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes scripts (resource) and references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve? AI coding agents frequently read a requirement and never turn it into an active obligation, then claim completion on top of it. This Skill freezes a small set of proof-backed obligations before any code is written and enforces verification by an independent agent, so unproven claims cannot pass as done. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Four-phase workflow: Plan (EARS acceptance criteria, flow, relations, surface, one-way doors), Checks (claims with concrete proofs and a coverage join), Build (tests written from checks, never from implementation), and Verify (a fresh sub-agent reviews the full diff). - Deterministic validation scripts: Python validators gate each phase, checking plan structure, check proofs, coverage completeness, Conventional Commits messages, and verification report integrity. - Profile-based verification depth: light, standard, and ui profiles declare how much verification runs, enforced by the completion gate script. - Use Case: A developer asks the agent to plan a lockfile migration feature. The Skill produces a human-reviewable plan with EARS criteria, derives proof-backed checks, builds against them, and dispatches an independent Verifier whose report must pass validate_verification.py before the work is declared done. ## Quick Start Ask the agent to plan a feature with pbs-spec-lean, for example by saying "pbs-spec-lean — plan the lockfile v2 migration", then review the generated plan before checks and code are written.

Frequently Asked Questions about pbs-spec-lean

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I plan a feature with spec-driven development?

Invoke the skill with a phrase like "plan feature" or "specify feature". It writes a plan.md containing the problem, EARS acceptance criteria, flow, relations, surface, and one-way doors, then runs validate_plan.py and stops for human review before any checks or code exist.

What are EARS acceptance criteria in software specs?

EARS (Easy Approach to Requirements Syntax) patterns phrase each criterion as Ubiquitous, WHEN/THEN, WHILE, WHERE, or IF/THEN statements containing SHALL and a concrete measurable value. The skill's validator fails any criterion that is not EARS-shaped.

Does this skill work without a Python execution environment?

Yes, but in a degraded mode. The validation scripts require Python 3 with standard library only; if no code-execution tool exists, the agent performs the same structural checks by reading the artifacts and states once that it is on the degraded path.

Why does verification require a separate sub-agent?

A self-check reproduces the author's own blind spots, so the skill mandates that a fresh Verifier sub-agent, dispatched by the orchestrator and never by the builder, reviews the full feature diff against every check. validate_verification.py fails a report written by the author.

When should I not use pbs-spec-lean?

Do not use it for standalone design documents unattached to a feature, architecture decomposition analysis, or work that already has a task list or checklist to execute. It is designed for feature work that needs obligations frozen before building.

What is the difference between light, standard, and ui profiles?

Profiles declare verification depth: light runs proofs at HEAD with located assertions, standard adds recomputed coverage and fault injection per assertion surface, and ui adds binding-source comparison and per-screen enumeration. The completion gate fails a report whose profile differs from the approved checks.