speckit-clarify

Structured clarification workflow for underspecified requirements. Use before planning to resolve ambiguities through coverage-based questioning. Records answers in spec clarifications section.

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 ./bundled/skills/speckit-clarify/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

77%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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

The skill body is highly actionable with concrete commands, templates, and a well-sequenced workflow including validation feedback loops. Its main weaknesses are verbosity and a monolithic inline structure with no progressive disclosure via bundle files.

Suggestions

Move the full ambiguity taxonomy and the multiple-choice option-table template into a references file (e.g. references/taxonomy.md) and link to it, keeping only the prioritization rules inline to improve progressive disclosure and conciseness.

Tighten verbose constraint lists (e.g. collapse the duplicated question-count rules and the escape-syntax aside) to reduce token cost without losing actionability.

Consider extracting the integration/editing rules (Step 5) into a short checklist reference so the core questioning loop reads more leanly.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is detailed but lengthy, with exhaustive option-table templates, escape-syntax notes, and many constraint clauses that could be trimmed. It avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, so it is above level 1, but the volume and redundancy keep it below the lean level-3 anchor.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides fully concrete, executable guidance: exact command ("check-prerequisites.ps1 -Json -PathsOnly"), exact output formats ("Recommended: Option [X] - <reasoning>"), a Markdown table template, atomic-overwrite and validation instructions. Matches the copy-paste-ready level-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A clear 8-step sequence with explicit validation checkpoints (Step 6), per-write validation feedback loops, and early-termination signals. The validate->fix->retry pattern and post-condition checks match the level-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files (references/scripts/assets) exist and the entire ~175-line workflow is inline in SKILL.md, making it monolithic. Structure is present but content that could be split (the taxonomy, the option-table template) is inline, matching the level-2 rather than the cleanly-referenced level-3 anchor.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 states both purpose and trigger timing, but it relies on procedural phrasing rather than natural user keywords and stays at a fairly abstract action level. It is reasonably distinct within the spec-kit suite but could overlap with related planning skills.

Suggestions

Add natural trigger terms users would say, e.g. "Use when a feature spec is ambiguous, vague, or underspecified and you need to clarify requirements before planning."

List one or two more concrete actions (e.g. "scans the spec across a coverage taxonomy, asks up to 5 prioritized questions, writes answers back into the spec") to lift specificity.

Sharpen distinctiveness by naming the spec-kit context in the description, e.g. "for spec-kit feature specs," to reduce overlap with generic planning skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and some concrete actions ("coverage-based questioning", "Records answers in spec clarifications section") but stays high-level rather than enumerating multiple specific operations. It is not level 3 because it does not list several distinct concrete actions.	2 / 3
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ("Structured clarification workflow... resolve ambiguities through coverage-based questioning") and when ("Use before planning to resolve ambiguities"). Both facets are present and explicit, matching the level-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Provides a timing trigger ("Use before planning") but lacks the natural keywords a user would actually say (e.g. "clarify spec", "ambiguous requirements", "unclear feature"). Not level 1 because some relevant terms exist, not level 3 because common user phrasings are missing.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Tied to the spec-kit domain which gives it a niche, but "underspecified requirements" and "before planning" overlap with adjacent planning/specify skills. Not level 3 because the niche is not sharply distinct from sibling skills.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 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
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: foryourhealth111-pixel/Vibe-Skills
Path: bundled/skills/speckit-clarify/SKILL.md
Commit: f627ab5

Reviewed: 11 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.