analysis-phase

<objective> Validates cross-artifact consistency and detects breaking changes during the /analyze phase. Ensures spec requirements align with plan components, tasks match implementation, and breaking changes are identified before deployment. </objective>

<quick_start> Validate cross-artifact consistency and detect breaking changes:

1. Check spec → plan → tasks alignment
2. Detect breaking changes (API, database, UI, auth)
3. Validate dependencies
4. Generate analysis-report.md with findings

Inputs: spec.md, plan.md, tasks.md Outputs: analysis-report.md </quick_start>

<workflow> <step number="1"> Check spec-plan consistency

Read spec.md requirements, verify each has corresponding plan component. Flag missing mappings in analysis report.

See references/examples.md for grep commands. </step>

<step number="2"> Verify task-implementation alignment

Read plan.md components, verify each broken into tasks in tasks.md.

Validate:

• Each plan component has ≥1 task
• Task acceptance criteria match spec success criteria
• No orphaned tasks (tasks without plan component)

</step>

<step number="3"> Detect breaking changes

Scan for patterns indicating breaking changes:

• API changes: Endpoint signature modifications, required parameter additions, response format changes
• Database changes: Schema modifications, required field additions, migrations affecting existing data
• UI changes: Component interface changes, prop requirement additions
• Auth changes: Permission model modifications, authentication flow changes

Flag with impact level (Low/Medium/High) using reference rubric. </step>

<step number="4"> Validate dependencies

Cross-reference:

• Imports and integrations mentioned in plan
• External dependencies in tasks
• Integration points in spec

Verify all dependencies documented and accounted for. </step>

<step number="5"> Generate analysis report

Create specs/NNN-slug/analysis-report.md:

# Analysis Report

## Consistency Check

- Spec-Plan: [✓/✗] Description
- Plan-Tasks: [✓/✗] Description

## Breaking Changes

- [High/Medium/Low] Description and impact

## Dependency Validation

- [✓/✗] Dependencies documented

## Recommendations

- Action items to fix inconsistencies

Update state.yaml: analysis.status = completed </step> </workflow>

<validation> After analysis, verify:

• All spec requirements have plan component coverage
• All plan components have task breakdown
• Breaking changes flagged with impact level (Low/Medium/High)
• Analysis report generated with actionable findings
• No orphaned artifacts (tasks without plan, plan without spec)

</validation>

<antipatterns> <pitfall name="missingbreaking_changes"> ❌ Don't: Assume no breaking changes without scanning ✅ Do: Explicitly check API signatures, database schema, required fields, auth changes

Why: Breaking changes missed in analysis cause production issues post-deployment </pitfall>

<pitfall name="inconsistent_artifacts"> ❌ Don't: Assume spec and plan are aligned ✅ Do: Explicitly validate each spec requirement has corresponding plan component

Why: Missing mappings lead to incomplete implementation </pitfall>

<pitfall name="nocrossreference"> ❌ Don't: Skip dependency validation ✅ Do: Cross-reference all imports, integrations, external dependencies

Why: Undocumented dependencies cause integration failures </pitfall>

<pitfall name="vague_findings"> ❌ Don't: Write vague findings like "inconsistencies found" ✅ Do: Specify exact artifacts, line numbers, and recommended fixes

Why: Actionable findings enable quick remediation </pitfall> </anti_patterns>

<success_criteria>

• All spec requirements mapped to plan components (no gaps)
• All plan components broken into tasks (no orphans)
• Breaking changes documented with impact level (High/Medium/Low)
• Dependencies validated and documented
• analysis-report.md generated with actionable findings
• state.yaml updated (analysis.status = completed)

</success_criteria>

<references> See references/ for:

• Cross-artifact consistency matrix
• Breaking change detection patterns
• Impact assessment rubric
• Real-world analysis examples

</references>