spec-crlp

Diagnose and fix implementation mismatches by reproducing failures and re-running validations.

3|Updated Apr 14, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/H2Sxxa/spec-coding-skills --skill spec-crlp
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: spec-crlp
Source: https://github.com/H2Sxxa/spec-coding-skills/tree/main/skills/spec-crlp
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/H2Sxxa/spec-coding-skills --skill spec-crlp

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill helps teams and agents diagnose and close gaps between an existing implementation and its intended specification by using concrete signals (tests, linters, logs, CI, and review feedback) to find root causes and apply minimal, verifiable fixes.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Reproduce and localize failures: Use failing tests, CI output, runtime logs, and review comments to narrow the problem to a concrete code path.
  • Root-cause diagnosis and minimal fixes: Prioritize evidence-backed explanations and the smallest coherent code change that restores compliance with acceptance criteria.
  • Validation and memory capture: Re-run discoverable validation commands, summarize residual risk, and persist reusable fixes or setup gotchas via spec-index for future use.
  • Use Case: Fix a regression after a refactor by reproducing failing tests, tracing the failure to a specific module, applying a focused fix, and verifying the change with the repository's validation steps.

Quick Start

Run a spec-driven correction loop on the repository to reproduce the failing test, identify the root cause, implement the smallest coherent fix, and re-run validation to confirm green status.

Frequently Asked Questions about spec-crlp

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I fix failing tests and CI failures using a spec-driven approach?

Spec-driven correction fixes failing tests by reproducing failures, localizing the root cause in the code path, and applying minimal verifiable changes to resolve mismatches between implementation and specification.

What is the best way to resolve linter warnings and runtime errors in existing code?

Resolving linter warnings and runtime errors involves using concrete signals like logs and review feedback to trace failures, then implementing the smallest coherent code change that restores compliance with acceptance criteria.

Do I need a SPEC.md file to run a root-cause diagnosis on my repository?

Root-cause diagnosis requires access to repository code and either discoverable validation commands or a repository SPEC.md to reproduce failures and verify that minimal fixes restore green status.

How to debug a regression after a refactor by tracing failing tests to a specific module?

Debug a regression by reproducing failing tests, tracing the failure to a specific module using CI output, applying a focused fix, and re-running validation steps to confirm the code passes.

Does spec-driven bugfixing work without prior memory or spec-index retrieval?

Spec-driven bugfixing persists reusable fixes and setup gotchas via spec-index retrieval to capture validation memory, but the core correction loop can still run using discoverable validation commands.

When should I avoid applying minimal fixes for code and specification mismatches?

Avoid minimal fixes when residual risk remains high after re-running validations, as the workflow prioritizes evidence-backed explanations and may require broader changes if the smallest coherent fix fails to restore compliance.