review-spec

Original：🇺🇸 English

Translated

Review a spec document against codebase reality, identifying gaps and ensuring sound, robust implementations.

1installs

Sourceferueda/agent-skills

Added on2026-02-16

NPX Install

npx skill4agent add ferueda/agent-skills review-spec

SKILL.md Content

View Translation Comparison →

Review the given spec document by analyzing both the spec AND the referenced codebase.

Process

Read the spec - Understand goals, phases, and proposed changes
Explore the codebase - Read files and code mentioned in the spec
Analyze patterns - Identify existing patterns, conventions, and architecture
Validate the plan - Ensure proposals align with codebase reality
Identify issues - Find gaps, risks, and improvement opportunities

Review Dimensions

Evaluate across these areas (focus on what's relevant):

Architecture: Component boundaries, data flow, API contracts, separation of concerns
Feasibility: Implementation complexity, technology trade-offs, effort estimation
Reliability: Error handling, retries, idempotency, graceful degradation
Performance: Bottlenecks, caching, query patterns, scaling approach
Security: Auth, data protection, input validation, audit logging
Edge Cases: Null handling, limits, timeouts, race conditions, partial failures
Testing: Testability, integration strategy, rollback considerations

Output Format

For each finding:

### [Finding Title]

**Category**: Architecture | Feasibility | Reliability | Performance | Security | Edge Case | Testing
**Severity**: Critical | High | Medium | Low
**Section**: [Spec section or phase]

**Issue**: [Clear problem description]
**Recommendation**: [Specific, actionable change]
**Rationale**: [Technical justification]

Guidelines

Verify against code - Don't trust the spec blindly; check actual implementations
Follow existing patterns - Recommendations should align with codebase conventions
Be specific - Reference exact files, functions, and line numbers
Prioritize - Order findings by severity and impact
Challenge assumptions - Question decisions that lack justification