/speckit.analyze

/speckit.analyze

{{INPUT}}

$1

Command Instructions

Steps

1. Locate artifacts:
   • If input names a feature or directory, use it.
   • Otherwise check

     .specify/specs/

     and ask if multiple features exist.
   • Load all available:

     spec.md

     ,

     plan.md

     ,

     tasks.md

     ,

     data-model.md

     ,

     contracts/*.md

     ,

     research.md

     .
   • Load

     .specify/memory/constitution.md

     .
2. Run six consistency checks. Record each finding with: category, severity (CRITICAL / HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW), location, description.
   • Constitution conflicts (auto-CRITICAL): Any plan or task that violates a MUST or SHOULD NOT principle.
   • Coverage gaps: Requirements with no corresponding tasks; tasks traceable to no requirement.
   • Inconsistency: Terminology drift, conflicting tech choices, ordering contradictions between artifacts.
   • Ambiguity: Vague terms (

     fast

     ,

     scalable

     ,

     secure

     ) without measurable criteria; unresolved

     [NEEDS CLARIFICATION]

     markers.
   • Underspecification: Incomplete acceptance criteria, undefined component references, missing error conditions in contracts.
   • Duplication: Near-identical requirements or tasks appearing in multiple places.
3. Produce analysis report in the conversation (do not write to any file):

   ## Consistency Analysis: <Feature Name>
   
   ### Findings (sorted CRITICAL → HIGH → MEDIUM → LOW, max 50 rows)
   | # | Severity | Category | Location | Finding |
   
   ### Coverage Matrix
   Each spec.md requirement → mapped tasks (or NONE)
   Each tasks.md task → source requirement (or NONE)
   
   ### Metrics
   - Requirement coverage: X%
   - Constitution violations: N
   - Ambiguous items: N
   - Duplicate items: N
   
   ### Recommended Next Actions

4. Offer remediation: If findings exist, ask: "Would you like me to fix any of these?" Apply only user-approved edits.

/speckit.tasks