smithery/1ambda
spec-validation
Self-evaluation and quality validation for specifications and documents. Identifies gaps, contradictions, and missing details using structured checklists. Use after drafting specs, PRDs, or feature documents.
Docs & files
Use judgment
Installs
0
Stars
—
Security
No audit
Freshness
Unknown
Updated
—
Installation
Project
Global
Entire repo
Entire repo (global)
$
npx skills add smithery/1ambda --skill spec-validation
Copy
SKILL.md
Spec Validation
Systematic quality validation for specifications using structured checklists and self-evaluation patterns.
When to Use
After drafting *_FEATURE.md specifications
Reviewing PRDs for completeness
Validating requirements before handoff
Self-checking document quality
Core Principle
The best form of feedback is clearly defined rules, then explaining which rules failed and why.
Validation Framework
1. Completeness Check
Section
Required Elements
Validation Question
Problem
Specific pain point
Is the problem measurable, not vague?
Users
Primary + secondary
Are personas defined with proficiency?
Scope
In-scope + non-goals
Are explicit exclusions documented?
Success
Quantified metrics
Can we measure success after 30 days?
Risks
Scenarios + mitigations
Is worst-case documented with exit strategy?
2. Clarity Check
Criterion
Test
Fix
No TBD/TODO
Search for "TBD", "TODO", "??", "TBC"
Resolve or escalate
Acronyms defined
All acronyms in glossary
Add definitions
Edge cases covered
Each use case has edge cases
Document behavior
Error messages actionable
User can self-resolve at 3 AM
Add context/guidance
3. Consistency Check
Check
Method
Resolution
Policy contradictions
Compare rules pairwise
Document precedence
Trade-off conflicts
Map priority vs constraint
Make explicit choice
Priority ambiguity
Count must-have items
Limit to 3-5 MVP items
4. Feasibility Check
Aspect
Validation
Owner
Technical constraints
Engineering review
Tech Lead
Dependencies
Identify external blockers
PM
Timeline
Scope vs deadline match
PM + Eng
Risks
Mitigation plans exist
PM
Self-Evaluation Pattern
Use mcpsequential-thinking sequentialthinking for systematic review:
# Structured self-evaluation
mcp__sequential-thinking__sequentialthinking(
thought="Reviewing spec for completeness: checking problem statement",
thoughtNumber=1,
totalThoughts=5,
nextThoughtNeeded=True
)
Sequential Review Steps
Problem Clarity : Is the root problem specific and measurable?
User Definition : Are primary users and stakeholders identified?
Scope Boundaries : Are in-scope and non-goals explicit?
Success Criteria : Can we objectively measure success?
Risk Coverage : Are failure scenarios and rollback documented?
Validation Report Template
## Spec Validation Report: {FEATURE_NAME}
### Summary
- **Overall Status**: PASS / NEEDS REVISION
- **Critical Issues**: {count}
- **Warnings**: {count}
### Completeness (X/5 sections)
| Section | Status | Issue |
|---------|--------|-------|
| Problem | PASS/FAIL | {detail if fail} |
| Users | PASS/FAIL | {detail if fail} |
| Scope | PASS/FAIL | {detail if fail} |
| Success | PASS/FAIL | {detail if fail} |
| Risks | PASS/FAIL | {detail if fail} |
### Clarity Issues
- [ ] {Issue 1}
- [ ] {Issue 2}
### Consistency Issues
- [ ] {Contradiction 1}
### Open Questions (Require Stakeholder Input)
1. {Question needing clarification}
### Recommendations
1. {Specific fix recommendation}
Common Validation Failures
Failure
Detection
Resolution
Vague success metric
"Improve", "faster", "better"
Quantify with numbers
Missing non-goals
No explicit exclusions
Ask "What are we NOT doing?"
Undefined edge cases
Happy path only
Apply "3 AM Test"
Policy contradiction
Rule A conflicts with Rule B
Document precedence
Stakeholder conflict
User A vs User B needs
Explicit prioritization
Integration Points
After requirements-discovery
Discovery Interview Complete
-> Draft *_FEATURE.md
-> spec-validation (this skill)
-> Identify gaps
-> Follow-up questions
-> Final draft
Before implementation
*_FEATURE.md Finalized
-> spec-validation final check
-> Engineering review
-> Implementation begins
Quick Checklist (Copy/Paste)
### Pre-Finalization Checklist
- [ ] Problem is specific, not vague
- [ ] Success metrics are quantified
- [ ] Non-goals are explicitly stated
- [ ] No TBD/TODO items remain
- [ ] Acronyms defined
- [ ] Edge cases documented
- [ ] Error messages are user-actionable
- [ ] No policy contradictions
- [ ] Trade-offs explicitly documented
- [ ] Priorities clear (must-have vs nice-to-have)
- [ ] Technical constraints validated
- [ ] Dependencies identified
- [ ] Risks have mitigation plans