spec-checklist

Generate custom quality checklists that validate REQUIREMENTS quality (not implementation). Use when user says "/spec-checklist", "create checklist for [domain]" to validate specification completeness before implementation.

Safety Notice

This listing is imported from skills.sh public index metadata. Review upstream SKILL.md and repository scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "spec-checklist" with this command: npx skills add xfstudio/skills/xfstudio-skills-spec-checklist

Spec-Checklist

Generate checklists that validate requirements quality - "unit tests for specifications".

Prerequisites: Feature directory must exist.

Core Concept

Checklists are UNIT TESTS FOR REQUIREMENTS - they validate the SPECIFICATION, not the implementation.

Wrong (Testing Implementation)

  • ❌ "Verify the button clicks correctly"
  • ❌ "Test error handling works"

Correct (Testing Requirements Quality)

  • ✅ "Are hover state requirements defined for all interactive elements?"
  • ✅ "Is 'prominent display' quantified with specific sizing?"
  • ✅ "Are accessibility requirements specified for keyboard navigation?"

Workflow

  1. Setup - Run .specify/scripts/bash/check-prerequisites.sh --json
  2. Clarify intent - Generate up to 3 contextual questions
  3. Load context - spec.md, plan.md, tasks.md
  4. Generate checklist - Create FEATURE_DIR/checklists/[domain].md
  5. Number items - CHK001, CHK002...

Checklist Categories

CategoryQuestion Pattern
Completeness"Are [requirements] defined for [scenario]?"
Clarity"Is [vague term] quantified with specific criteria?"
Consistency"Do [requirements] align across [contexts]?"
Measurability"Can [criterion] be objectively verified?"
Coverage"Are [scenario type] requirements addressed?"

Item Structure

- [ ] CHK001 Are visual hierarchy requirements defined for all card types? [Completeness]
- [ ] CHK002 Is 'prominent display' quantified with sizing/positioning? [Clarity, Spec §FR-4]
- [ ] CHK003 Are hover states consistent across interactive elements? [Consistency]

Traceability Markers

  • [Spec §X.Y] - Reference to spec section
  • [Gap] - Missing requirement
  • [Ambiguity] - Unclear requirement
  • [Conflict] - Contradicting requirements

Prohibited Patterns

❌ Never use:

  • "Verify", "Test", "Confirm" + implementation behavior
  • "Displays correctly", "works properly"
  • "Click", "navigate", "render", "load"

✅ Always use:

  • "Are [requirements] defined/specified/documented?"
  • "Is [term] quantified/clarified?"
  • "Do [requirements] align/cover?"

Content Rules

  • Soft cap: 40 items max
  • Merge near-duplicates
  • ≥80% must have traceability reference

Next Steps

After /spec-checklist:

  • Review and complete checklist items
  • /spec-implement - Execute with checklist validation

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

General

last30days

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

ralph-loop

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

3d-web-experience

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

baoyu-url-to-markdown

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review