openspec-verify-change

Verify implementation matches change artifacts. Use when the user wants to validate that implementation is complete, correct, and coherent before archiving.

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/openspec-verify-change/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

75%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 content is a well-structured, actionable verification workflow with concrete CLI commands and clear sequencing; it is concise for its complexity and handles missing-artifact degradation gracefully, with only minor opportunities to tighten prose or externalize the report template.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is efficient for a complex multi-step skill: it assumes Claude's competence and gives operational guidance rather than explaining openspec concepts, with only minor padding (the dense store-selection paragraph and the verbatim report template) that could be trimmed slightly.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete, executable CLI commands (`openspec status --change "<name>" --json`, `openspec instructions apply --change "<name>" --json`, `openspec list --json`) and a precise report/issue structure; a few sub-steps ('Search codebase for keywords', 'Assess if implementation likely exists') remain heuristic rather than fully specified.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	An explicit 8-step sequence with a checklist-like report structure and a graceful-degradation section covering missing artifacts; no destructive/batch feedback loop is required for a read-only verification skill, so it sits just below a 5 for lacking an explicit validate-then-act checkpoint pattern.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized into clearly labeled sections (Steps, Verification Heuristics, Graceful Degradation, Output Format) with no nested references; the self-contained single-file structure is appropriate, though the report template and heuristics could optionally be split into a reference file.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

70%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 cleanly answers what and when with an explicit trigger clause and low conflict risk, but the capability description relies on a single verb plus adjectives rather than enumerating the concrete verification actions the skill performs.

Suggestions

Expand the 'what' to list the concrete checks performed, e.g. 'Verify task completion, spec coverage, requirement implementation, scenario coverage, and design adherence against change artifacts.'

Add a couple of natural trigger synonyms users might say, such as 'review the change' or 'check tasks before archiving'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('Verify implementation matches change artifacts') and the three verification qualities (complete, correct, coherent), but the action surface is essentially a single verb ('verify') rather than a list of distinct concrete actions, so coverage is not comprehensive.	3 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly states both what ('Verify implementation matches change artifacts') and when ('Use when the user wants to validate that implementation is complete, correct, and coherent before archiving'); the 'what' clause is clear but terse and could enumerate the concrete checks more fully, keeping it just below a 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural trigger phrases a user would actually say ('validate that implementation is complete', 'before archiving', 'verify implementation'), with good keyword coverage; a few common synonyms (e.g. 'review the change', 'check tasks') are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'before archiving' / change-artifact framing carves a recognizable niche tied to the openspec archive workflow, with only minor overlap risk against generic review or validation skills.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: Fission-AI/OpenSpec
Path: skills/openspec-verify-change/SKILL.md
Commit: 6926ccb

Reviewed: about 17 hours 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.