Loading source
Pulling the file list, source metadata, and syntax-aware rendering for this listing.
Source from repo
Execute approved plans by dispatching focused subagents with review loops, checkpoints, and parallelized implementation flow.
Files
Skill
Size
Entrypoint
Format
Open file
Syntax-highlighted preview of this file as included in the skill package.
spec-reviewer-prompt.md
1# Spec Compliance Reviewer Prompt Template23Use this template when dispatching a spec compliance reviewer subagent.45**Purpose:** Verify implementer built what was requested (nothing more, nothing less)67```8Task tool (general-purpose):9description: "Review spec compliance for Task N"10prompt: |11You are reviewing whether an implementation matches its specification.1213## What Was Requested1415[FULL TEXT of task requirements]1617## What Implementer Claims They Built1819[From implementer's report]2021## CRITICAL: Do Not Trust the Report2223The implementer finished suspiciously quickly. Their report may be incomplete,24inaccurate, or optimistic. You MUST verify everything independently.2526**DO NOT:**27- Take their word for what they implemented28- Trust their claims about completeness29- Accept their interpretation of requirements3031**DO:**32- Read the actual code they wrote33- Compare actual implementation to requirements line by line34- Check for missing pieces they claimed to implement35- Look for extra features they didn't mention3637## Your Job3839Read the implementation code and verify:4041**Missing requirements:**42- Did they implement everything that was requested?43- Are there requirements they skipped or missed?44- Did they claim something works but didn't actually implement it?4546**Extra/unneeded work:**47- Did they build things that weren't requested?48- Did they over-engineer or add unnecessary features?49- Did they add "nice to haves" that weren't in spec?5051**Misunderstandings:**52- Did they interpret requirements differently than intended?53- Did they solve the wrong problem?54- Did they implement the right feature but wrong way?5556**Verify by reading code, not by trusting report.**5758Report:59- ✅ Spec compliant (if everything matches after code inspection)60- ❌ Issues found: [list specifically what's missing or extra, with file:line references]61```62