spec-feature

Spec a new feature — recall architecture knowledge, create a spec document, build an implementation plan, and break into tasks.

Quality

72%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/spec-feature/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is a well-sequenced, highly actionable planning workflow with concrete templates, tool calls, and validation checkpoints. Its main weakness is conciseness — the handoff mechanics and diagram defaults over-explain implementation details Claude could infer.

Suggestions

Trim the step 8 handoff paragraph to the essential invocation and arguments; let the phase-handoff skill own its internal mechanics.

De-duplicate the diagram guidance: state the REQUIRED default once rather than restating 'Every non-trivial spec ships ...' near the end.

Consider externalizing the lengthy spec template into a referenced file if the skill grows further, keeping SKILL.md as an overview.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly efficient but includes over-explanation that could be tightened, notably the long handoff internals paragraph (worktree/spawn_task mechanics) and repeated diagram-shipping defaults, which spell out behavior Claude could infer.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete, executable guidance — regex, bash snippet, file path, full copy-paste spec template, and named tool calls (mark_chapter, Hindsight recall/retain, devflow:phase-handoff) — with minor gaps in the exploratory steps ('Explore the existing codebase', 'Recall architecture knowledge').	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clearly numbered Preamble + Steps 1-8 sequence with explicit checkpoints (clarifying-question gates in step 1, user review in step 6) and a task checklist in step 5, though no explicit fix-and-retry error-recovery loop is present.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized with clear headers and sectioned steps; no bundle files exist, the inlined spec template is the core deliverable, and sibling-skill references (render-diagram, phase-handoff) are clearly signaled, with only minor organization gaps around the dense handoff paragraph.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

66%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description clearly communicates four concrete speccing actions and occupies a distinct niche, but it omits any explicit 'when to use' trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3. Adding a 'Use when ...' clause would meaningfully raise the score.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when ...' trigger clause (e.g., 'Use when starting a new feature before implementation, or when the user asks to spec, design, or plan a feature').

Include common synonyms/variants users might say — 'design', 'RFC', 'proposal', 'technical spec' — to broaden trigger coverage.

Tighten 'recall architecture knowledge' into a more concrete action verb phrase.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists four concrete actions — 'recall architecture knowledge', 'create a spec document', 'build an implementation plan', and 'break into tasks' — giving several specific actions with only minor gaps, though 'recall architecture knowledge' is somewhat abstract.	4 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clearly stated but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, so per the cap completeness cannot exceed 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural developer-facing terms like 'spec a new feature', 'spec document', 'implementation plan', and 'break into tasks' give good keyword coverage, though synonyms like 'design', 'RFC', or 'proposal' are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The feature-speccing niche is mostly distinct with concrete speccing actions, carrying only minor overlap risk with sibling devflow planning skills (writing-plans, phase-handoff).	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
relative_links	Relative link issues: 2 missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: AndreJorgeLopes/devflow
Path: skills/spec-feature/SKILL.md
Commit: bd4b70c

Reviewed: 13 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.