name:

iikit-07-analyze

description:

Validate cross-artifact consistency between spec, plan, and tasks

Intent Integrity Kit Analyze

Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.

User Input

$ARGUMENTS

You MUST consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).

Operating Constraints

STRICTLY READ-ONLY: Do not modify any files. Output a structured analysis report. Offer an optional remediation plan (user must explicitly approve before any editing).

Constitution Authority: The project constitution (CONSTITUTION.md) is non-negotiable within this analysis scope. Constitution conflicts are automatically CRITICAL and require adjustment of the spec, plan, or tasks--not dilution, reinterpretation, or silent ignoring of the principle.

Constitution Loading (REQUIRED)

Before ANY action, load the project constitution:

1. Read constitution:

   cat CONSTITUTION.md 2>/dev/null || echo "NO_CONSTITUTION"

2. If file doesn't exist:

   ERROR: Project constitution not found at CONSTITUTION.md
   
   Cannot proceed without constitution.
   Run: /iikit-00-constitution

3. Extract principle names and MUST/SHOULD normative statements.

Prerequisites Check

1. Run prerequisites check:

   bash .tessl/tiles/tessl-labs/intent-integrity-kit/skills/iikit-core/scripts/bash/check-prerequisites.sh --json --require-tasks --include-tasks

2. Parse JSON for FEATURE_DIR and AVAILABLE_DOCS.

3. Derive absolute paths:

   • SPEC = FEATURE_DIR/spec.md
   • PLAN = FEATURE_DIR/plan.md
   • TASKS = FEATURE_DIR/tasks.md

4. If any required file is missing:

   ERROR: Required artifact missing.
   
   Missing: [spec.md | plan.md | tasks.md]
   Run the appropriate skill to create the missing artifact:
   - spec.md:  /iikit-01-specify <feature description>
   - plan.md:  /iikit-03-plan
   - tasks.md: /iikit-06-tasks

Execution Steps

1. Load Artifacts (Progressive Disclosure)

Load only minimal necessary context from each artifact:

From spec.md:

• Overview/Context
• Functional Requirements
• Non-Functional Requirements
• User Stories
• Edge Cases

From plan.md:

• Architecture/stack choices
• Data Model references
• Phases
• Technical constraints

From tasks.md:

• Task IDs
• Descriptions
• Phase grouping
• Parallel markers [P]
• Referenced file paths

2. Build Semantic Models

Create internal representations (do not include raw artifacts in output):

• Requirements inventory: Each functional + non-functional requirement with stable key
• User story/action inventory: Discrete user actions with acceptance criteria
• Task coverage mapping: Map each task to one or more requirements or stories
• Constitution rule set: Principle names and normative statements

3. Detection Passes (Token-Efficient Analysis)

Focus on high-signal findings. Limit to 50 findings total.

A. Duplication Detection

• Identify near-duplicate requirements
• Mark lower-quality phrasing for consolidation

B. Ambiguity Detection

• Flag vague adjectives (fast, scalable, secure, intuitive, robust) lacking measurable criteria
• Flag unresolved placeholders (TODO, TKTK, ???, <placeholder>)

C. Underspecification

• Requirements with verbs but missing object or measurable outcome
• User stories missing acceptance criteria alignment
• Tasks referencing files or components not defined in spec/plan

D. Constitution Alignment

• Any requirement or plan element conflicting with a MUST principle
• Missing mandated sections or quality gates from constitution

E. Phase Separation Violations (CRITICAL)

Check each artifact for content that belongs elsewhere:

Constitution violations (tech in governance):

• Programming languages, frameworks, databases mentioned
• Specific tools or versions
• Infrastructure or deployment details

Spec violations (implementation in requirements):

• Framework or library references
• API implementation details (REST endpoints, GraphQL schemas)
• Database schemas or table structures
• Architecture patterns (microservices, serverless)
• Code organization or file structures

Plan violations (governance in technical):

• Project-wide principles or "laws" (should reference constitution)
• Non-negotiable rules that apply beyond this feature
• Team workflow or process requirements
• Quality standards not specific to this implementation

Report format:

PHASE SEPARATION VIOLATIONS:
- [CRITICAL] constitution.md line 45: "Use Python 3.11" (tech in governance)
- [CRITICAL] spec.md line 120: "REST API endpoint /users" (impl in spec)
- [HIGH] plan.md line 30: "All code must have tests" (governance in plan)

G. Coverage Gaps

• Requirements with zero associated tasks
• Tasks with no mapped requirement/story
• Non-functional requirements not reflected in tasks

H. Inconsistency

• Terminology drift (same concept named differently across files)
• Data entities referenced in plan but absent in spec (or vice versa)
• Task ordering contradictions
• Conflicting requirements

4. Severity Assignment

• CRITICAL: Violates constitution MUST, phase separation violation, missing core spec artifact, or requirement with zero coverage that blocks baseline functionality
• HIGH: Duplicate or conflicting requirement, ambiguous security/performance attribute, untestable acceptance criterion
• MEDIUM: Terminology drift, missing non-functional task coverage, underspecified edge case
• LOW: Style/wording improvements, minor redundancy

5. Produce Analysis Report

Output a Markdown report (no file writes):

## Specification Analysis Report

| ID | Category | Severity | Location(s) | Summary | Recommendation |
|----|----------|----------|-------------|---------|----------------|
| A1 | Duplication | HIGH | spec.md:L120-134 | Two similar requirements ... | Merge phrasing |

**Coverage Summary Table:**

| Requirement Key | Has Task? | Task IDs | Notes |
|-----------------|-----------|----------|-------|

**Phase Separation Violations:** (if any)
| Artifact | Line | Violation | Severity |
|----------|------|-----------|----------|

**Constitution Alignment Issues:** (if any)

**Unmapped Tasks:** (if any)

**Metrics:**
- Total Requirements
- Total Tasks
- Coverage % (requirements with >=1 task)
- Ambiguity Count
- Duplication Count
- Critical Issues Count

6. Next Actions

At end of report, output a concise Next Actions block:

• If CRITICAL issues exist: Recommend resolving before /iikit-08-implement
• If only LOW/MEDIUM: User may proceed, but provide improvement suggestions
• Provide explicit command suggestions

7. Offer Remediation

Ask the user: "Would you like me to suggest concrete remediation edits for the top N issues?" (Do NOT apply them automatically.)

Operating Principles

Context Efficiency

• Minimal high-signal tokens: Focus on actionable findings
• Progressive disclosure: Load artifacts incrementally
• Token-efficient output: Limit findings table to 50 rows
• Deterministic results: Rerunning should produce consistent IDs and counts

Analysis Guidelines

• NEVER modify files (this is read-only analysis)
• NEVER hallucinate missing sections (report accurately)
• Prioritize constitution violations (always CRITICAL)
• Use examples over exhaustive rules (cite specific instances)
• Report zero issues gracefully (emit success report with coverage statistics)

Next Steps

After analysis:

• If CRITICAL issues: Resolve them first, then re-run /iikit-07-analyze
• If no CRITICAL issues: Run /iikit-08-implement to execute the implementation

The implement skill will perform its own prerequisite checks before proceeding.