reversa-quality

Audit feature requirements text for clarity, completeness, and consistency.

1.5k|383|Updated Apr 26, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/sandeco/reversa --skill reversa-quality-sandeco
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: reversa-quality
Source: https://github.com/sandeco/reversa/tree/main/agents/reversa-quality
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/sandeco/reversa --skill reversa-quality-sandeco

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Reversa-quality improves how clear and complete your feature requirements are so they can be converted into an unambiguous execution plan by AI agents.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Text quality auditing: Checks whether the prose is clear enough to avoid ambiguity during planning and coding.
  • Requirements-focused validation: Focuses on writing quality and structure of requirements, not on implementation test coverage.
  • Audit report output: Produces a traceable audit report in the feature audit folder, including a final approval status and guidance for the next step.

Quick Start

Run the reversa-quality skill after selecting the active feature so it audits the feature-dir/requirements.md and writes requirements-audit.md.

Frequently Asked Questions about reversa-quality

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I audit requirements for clarity before AI planning?

To audit requirements for clarity before AI planning, run an automated textual quality check on your requirements.md file to validate structure, scenario coverage, and glossary alignment. This generates a checklist-driven audit report to ensure your feature prose is unambiguous for agent execution.

Why does my AI agent generate an ambiguous execution plan from feature requirements?

AI agents generate ambiguous execution plans when feature requirements lack textual clarity, completeness, or consistency. Running a requirements-focused quality audit validates prose structure and Gherkin scenario coverage, ensuring the specification is unambiguous before forward-cycle planning and code generation.

Can I validate Gherkin scenario coverage without checking implementation test code?

Yes, you can validate Gherkin scenario coverage independently by running a requirements-focused textual quality audit. This checks writing quality, scenario coverage, and glossary alignment within the requirements.md file, producing an audit report without evaluating underlying implementation test coverage.

What is the best way to check if requirements are ready for a forward-cycle AI agent?

The best way to check if requirements are ready for forward-cycle AI agents is to run a quality hook that audits the active requirements file. This validates textual clarity, structure, and glossary alignment, then outputs a traceable requirements-audit.md report with an approval verdict and next-step guidance.

Do I need to set up an active feature state before auditing requirements quality?

Yes, you must select an active feature and set the active state before auditing requirements quality. The audit process reads the active-requirements data to locate the feature-dir/requirements.md file, runs the before-quality hook, and atomically persists the requirements-audit.md report.