specification-compliance-review

Audit implementations against explicit specifications with requirement matrices and execution evidence.

115|9|Updated Aug 5, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/AtlasOmnia/donna-starter --skill specification-compliance-review-atlasomnia
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: specification-compliance-review
Source: https://github.com/AtlasOmnia/donna-starter/tree/main/skills/software-development/specification-compliance-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/AtlasOmnia/donna-starter --skill specification-compliance-review-atlasomnia

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve? A green build or passing test suite does not prove an implementation satisfies its specification. This Skill audits partial or claimed-complete implementations against every normative requirement, exposing vacuous tests, unproven concurrency invariants, and scope drift that generic code reviews miss. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Requirement Matrix Auditing: Decompose a specification into normative clauses and prove each one with production code paths, meaningful tests, and real execution output. - Adversarial Test Review: Detect vacuous race, cancellation, and timeout tests whose setup never creates the required condition or whose assertions observe the wrong interval. - Concurrency & Lifecycle Verification: Prove single-worker latest-pending pipelines, generation gating, transport cleanup ordering, and stale-callback rejection with deterministic evidence. - Use Case: A reviewer is told a Swift TTS provider refactor "passes all tests." Use this Skill to trace each spec clause through the pipeline, discover that the one-active-transport test only measures send callbacks, and report the requirement as unproven with the exact corrective test needed. ## Quick Start Review the current branch's implementation against the task specification and produce a requirement matrix with a PASS, PASS WITH GAPS, or FAIL verdict.

Frequently Asked Questions about specification-compliance-review

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I verify an implementation actually meets its specification?

Build a requirement matrix with one row per normative clause, then prove each row with a production code path, a test that creates the required condition, and real execution output. Keep unknown distinct from fail and never equate a green build with specification compliance.

How to review concurrency tests for race conditions?

Inspect what each test holds open, when the competing operation starts, and whether the assertion observes the overlap interval. Reject tests that release the first operation before starting the second or that measure only callbacks instead of worker and transport lifetime.

Can a passing test suite still fail specification compliance?

Yes. A passing suite proves only the tested examples, not race behavior, cancellation semantics, or integration parity. Tests can also be vacuous if their setup never creates the required condition or their assertions observe the wrong invariant.

What is the difference between milestone acceptance and product completion?

Milestone acceptance proves only the implemented scope of that phase, such as a native launch or clean synchronization. Whole-product completion requires tracing every normative clause and prototype control through UI, persistence, tests, and native evidence, reported as separate verdicts.

Why do iOS simulator tests report as unverified during review?

A generic destination like generic/platform=iOS supports compilation but not XCTest execution. Discover a concrete simulator with xcodebuild -showdestinations and rerun tests against it; if none exists, report the subset as unverified (environmental) rather than a source defect.

When should a security concern block a specification review?

Only when the specification's stated threat model makes it normative. Do not treat Origin headers or current-user secret storage as defenses against hostile same-user code, and do not report speculative concerns as compliance failures without a normative requirement.