skills.rest
antstanley
antstanleyCOMMUNITY
Explore all skills by this author →
GitHub

spec-reviewer

Review canonical and change specs against code using semi-formal certificate templates.

Updated May 4, 2026
Search Tags:#spec review#spec-driven development#documentation audit#design drift#code conformance#change spec#verdict rubric
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/antstanley/skills --skill spec-reviewer-antstanley
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: spec-reviewer
Source: https://github.com/antstanley/skills/tree/main/plugins/spec-creator/skills/spec-reviewer
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/antstanley/skills --skill spec-reviewer-antstanley

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve? Specs drift from code and from each other: change specs reference renamed pages, canonical pages describe features never shipped, and shipped features go undocumented. This Skill reviews specs with a disciplined, evidence-traced procedure that produces a fixed verdict instead of an impression. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Three review modes: R1 checks a change spec against the canonical spec it targets (broken references, contradictions); R2 checks a canonical spec against the code (missing, incorrect, or unspec'd implementations); R3 checks whether a change spec's delta has shipped (NONE / PARTIAL / IMPLEMENTED with a gap list). - Certificate-style templates: each mode follows literal numbered steps — premises, reference resolution, consistency trace, schema check, and a fixed verdict rubric — so the same spec earns the same verdict regardless of who reviews it. - Design-drift review: an R2 adaptation compares implemented UI behavior against canonical design guidelines, separating policy adoption from implementation compliance and handling stale evidence. - Use Case: Before merging a change spec that adds a Tag entity, run R3 to confirm the code shipped, then R1 to confirm the delta is still consistent with the canonical pages it modifies. ## Quick Start Ask the assistant to review the change spec at .specs/changes/ against the canonical spec and report whether it is consistent and implemented.

Frequently Asked Questions about spec-reviewer

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I check whether a change spec has been implemented in the code?▼

Use the R3 review mode, which extracts code-level expectations from the change spec's Type changes fragment and Implementation notes, then resolves each against the code. It returns an implementation status of NONE, PARTIAL, or IMPLEMENTED with a gap list anchored to file:line.

How do I find divergences between a spec and its implementation?▼

Run the R2 canonical-vs-code review. It performs a forward pass mapping every spec claim to code and a reverse pass flagging shipped code the spec never mentions, classifying each finding as MISSING, INCORRECT, or UNSPEC'D with a remedy.

What does the spec review check before merging a change spec?▼

The R1 template resolves every reference in the change spec's Affected spec pages table and Proposed changes blocks, catching renamed pages, stale targets, and contradictions with canonical prose. It ends with a verdict of CONSISTENT, LIKELY_CONSISTENT, CONCERNS, or INCONSISTENT.

Can the reviewer fix the spec or code issues it finds?▼

No. The reviewer surfaces issues and proposes concrete edits, but authoring changes to canonical pages or change specs is handed back to the spec-creator skill, and code fixes are left to the user. It never edits specs or flips a change spec's status unprompted.

Does the design-drift review work without rendered UI evidence?▼

It verifies what source and tokens can prove, but visual, reflow, focus, and motion claims require rendered or interaction evidence. When that evidence is unavailable, claims are marked UNVERIFIED and the verdict is CONCERNS rather than CONFORMS or DIVERGES.

When should I not use the certificate review templates?▼

Skip the templates for trivial spec changes like typo fixes, date bumps, or formatting corrections, and for self-contained prose pages with no references or code to map. For a single planned task's done-ness, use validate-done-certificate instead.

Related Skills

Explore More Software Engineering Skills→
firstsun-devfirstsun-dev
3

openspec-sync-specs

Merge delta specs from an OpenSpec change into main capability specs.

Official
Advanced
Dev10x-GuruDev10x-Guru
7

Dev10x:spec-update

Require canonical specification updates before implementing behavior changes.

Official
Intermediate
rickyanandarickyananda
1

subagent-driven-development

Assign implementation plan tasks to fresh subagents with two-stage review.

Community
Advanced
bellugabelluga

wf-docker-documentation-migration-method

Migrate legacy documentation into canonical Delphi templates with gap analysis and milestones.

Official
Advanced