Back to Details

cmd-speckit-checklist

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

/speckit.checklist

/speckit.checklist

Agent skill wrapper for the Claude command 
/speckit.checklist
.
When the original command text references 
{{INPUT}}
, 
$1
, or named arguments, map them from the user's current request.
用于Claude命令
/speckit.checklist
的Agent技能封装器。
当原始命令文本引用
{{INPUT}}
、
$1
或命名参数时，请从用户当前请求中映射对应内容。

Command Instructions

命令说明

Generate requirements quality checklists — "unit tests for requirements writing." These validate that specs are complete, clear, and unambiguous. They do NOT test implementation behavior.
生成需求质量检查表——即“需求撰写的单元测试”。这些检查表用于验证规格说明是否完整、清晰且无歧义，不用于测试实现行为。

Steps

步骤

  1. Parse input: From the provided input, identify a quality domain (e.g., 
    security
    , 
    performance
    , 
    API design
    , 
    data modeling
    ) and/or a feature name. If neither is clear, ask up to 3 targeted questions:
    • What feature is this checklist for?
    • What quality domain should it focus on?
    • Are there specific concerns from the constitution or prior analysis?
  2. Locate artifacts: Load 
    spec.md
    for the identified feature, plus 
    plan.md
    and 
    tasks.md
    if available. Load 
    .specify/memory/constitution.md
    .
  3. Generate 
    FEATURE_DIR/checklists/<domain>.md
    :
    markdown
    # Quality Checklist: <Domain> — <Feature Name>

**Generated**: <YYYY-MM-DD>
**Scope**: Requirements quality validation (not implementation verification)

## Completeness
- [ ] CHK001 Are all user scenarios covered by at least one functional requirement? [Completeness, Spec §User Scenarios]
- [ ] CHK002 Does each functional requirement have a corresponding success criterion? [Completeness, Spec §Success Criteria]

## Clarity
- [ ] CHK010 Are all vague terms replaced with measurable criteria? [Clarity, Gap]
- [ ] CHK011 Is every acronym and domain term defined? [Clarity, Spec §Key Entities]

## Consistency
- [ ] CHK020 Is the same term used consistently for the same concept throughout? [Consistency]

## Coverage
- [ ] CHK030 Are error conditions addressed for each user scenario? [Gap]
- [ ] CHK031 Are non-functional requirements specified? [Gap]

## Measurability
- [ ] CHK040 Does each success criterion include a specific metric or verifiable condition? [Measurability, Spec §Success Criteria]
    Item rules:
    • Ask about requirement quality, never implementation success. Bad: "Verify the button works." Good: "Is the expected button behavior described for each user scenario?"
    • Include a quality dimension in brackets: 
      [Completeness]
      , 
      [Clarity]
      , 
      [Consistency]
      , 
      [Gap]
      , 
      [Ambiguity]
      , 
      [Conflict]
      , 
      [Measurability]
    • Reference specific spec sections: 
      [Spec §X.Y]
    • At least 80% of items must trace to a specific spec section or an identified gap
  4. Report: File path, total item count, breakdown by quality dimension.
Next step: Complete all checklist items before running 
/speckit.implement
.
{{INPUT}}
  1. 解析输入：从提供的输入中，确定质量领域（例如：
    security
    、
    performance
    、
    API design
    、
    data modeling
    ）和/或功能名称。若两者均不明确，可提出最多3个针对性问题：
    • 此检查表针对哪个功能？
    • 应聚焦哪个质量领域？
    • 是否有来自章程或先前分析的特定关注点？
  2. 定位工件：加载已识别功能对应的
    spec.md
    ，若可用还需加载
    plan.md
    和
    tasks.md
    。同时加载
    .specify/memory/constitution.md
    。
  3. 生成
    FEATURE_DIR/checklists/<domain>.md
    ：
    markdown
    # Quality Checklist: <Domain> — <Feature Name>

**Generated**: <YYYY-MM-DD>
**Scope**: Requirements quality validation (not implementation verification)

## Completeness
- [ ] CHK001 Are all user scenarios covered by at least one functional requirement? [Completeness, Spec §User Scenarios]
- [ ] CHK002 Does each functional requirement have a corresponding success criterion? [Completeness, Spec §Success Criteria]

## Clarity
- [ ] CHK010 Are all vague terms replaced with measurable criteria? [Clarity, Gap]
- [ ] CHK011 Is every acronym and domain term defined? [Clarity, Spec §Key Entities]

## Consistency
- [ ] CHK020 Is the same term used consistently for the same concept throughout? [Consistency]

## Coverage
- [ ] CHK030 Are error conditions addressed for each user scenario? [Gap]
- [ ] CHK031 Are non-functional requirements specified? [Gap]

## Measurability
- [ ] CHK040 Does each success criterion include a specific metric or verifiable condition? [Measurability, Spec §Success Criteria]
    条目规则：
    • 仅询问需求质量相关问题，绝不涉及实现成功与否。错误示例：“验证按钮是否可用。”正确示例：“是否针对每个用户场景描述了预期的按钮行为？”
    • 在括号中包含质量维度：
      [Completeness]
      、
      [Clarity]
      、
      [Consistency]
      、
      [Gap]
      、
      [Ambiguity]
      、
      [Conflict]
      、
      [Measurability]
    • 引用特定的规格说明章节：
      [Spec §X.Y]
    • 至少80%的条目必须关联到特定的规格说明章节或已识别的缺口
  4. 报告：文件路径、条目总数、按质量维度分类的明细。
下一步：在运行
/speckit.implement
之前完成所有检查表条目。
{{INPUT}}