smithery/lofidonut3

speckit.evaluate

Evaluate feature spec against market research to identify features to add, remove, or modify. Use after /speckit.research to finalize spec before design.

Installation

$ npx skills add smithery/lofidonut3 --skill speckitevaluate

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from smithery/lofidonut3.

npx skills add smithery/lofidonut3

Browse all from smithery/lofidonut3

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 4,854 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 176 B

History

  1. First recorded snapshot · 0 installs

SKILL.md

Speckit Evaluate

Purpose: Evaluate the clarified spec against market research findings to optimize feature set before design phase.

When to Use

  • After Phase 3.5 (Research) is complete
  • Before Phase 4 (Design)
  • When research.md exists

Prerequisites

  • Spec exists at .github/speckit/specs/{feature-name}.md
  • Spec status is clarified
  • Research exists at .github/speckit/specs/{feature-name}/research.md
  • User has reviewed research findings

Execution

1. Delegate to Architect (Opus)

Use speckit-architect for deep reasoning evaluation:

task(
  subagent_type="speckit-architect",
  description="Evaluate spec against market research",
  prompt="Evaluate this feature spec against the market research.

  **Spec Path**: {spec path}
  **Research Path**: {research.md path}

  Read both files thoroughly, then provide evaluation:

  ## 1. Features to ADD
  What's missing that competitors have or market expects?
  - Feature name
  - Rationale (why it's needed)
  - Evidence (from research - which competitor, which trend)
  - Impact: High/Medium/Low
  - Effort estimate: Small/Medium/Large

  ## 2. Features to REMOVE
  What's over-engineered, unnecessary, or doesn't align with market?
  - Feature name
  - Rationale (why remove)
  - Evidence (competitors don't have it, not a best practice, etc.)
  - Risk of keeping it

  ## 3. Features to MODIFY
  What needs adjustment based on best practices?
  - Feature name
  - Current approach (from spec)
  - Suggested change
  - Rationale and evidence
  - Impact: High/Medium/Low

  ## 4. Priority Assessment
  Categorize ALL features (existing + suggested additions):
  - **Must-Have (P0)**: Core value, competitors all have it
  - **Should-Have (P1)**: Expected by users, differentiator
  - **Nice-to-Have (P2)**: Enhancement, future consideration

  ## 5. Differentiation Strategy
  Based on research, how should this feature stand out?
  - Key differentiators to emphasize
  - Unique value proposition
  - Positioning against competitors

  Be specific and cite evidence from research.md for each recommendation."
)

2. Present Evaluation to User

For each recommendation, ask user to Accept or Reject:

## Features to ADD

### 1. {Feature Name}
- **Rationale**: {why}
- **Evidence**: {from research}
- **Impact**: High | **Effort**: Medium

→ [Accept] / [Reject]
User decision: ___

### 2. {Feature Name}
...

## Features to REMOVE
...

## Features to MODIFY
...

3. Record Decisions

For each suggestion:

  • If Accept: Mark for inclusion in spec update
  • If Reject: Record user's reasoning

4. Update Spec

Apply accepted changes:

  • Add new features to spec
  • Remove rejected features
  • Modify adjusted features
  • Update priority order based on assessment

5. Save Evaluation

Save to: .github/speckit/specs/{feature-name}/evaluation.md

Include:

  • All recommendations
  • User decisions (accept/reject)
  • Reasoning for rejections
  • Final priority list

6. Finalize

  • Update spec status to evaluated
  • Confirm with user: "Spec is now finalized. Ready to proceed to Design?"
  • STOP and wait for explicit approval

Output Format

# Feature Evaluation: {Feature Name}

**Generated**: {date}
**Spec**: {spec path}
**Research**: {research path}
**Status**: Complete

## Evaluation Summary

| Category | Count | Accepted | Rejected |
|----------|-------|----------|----------|
| Add | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Remove | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| Modify | 4 | 3 | 1 |

## Detailed Recommendations

### Features to ADD

#### 1. {Feature Name} ✅ ACCEPTED
- **Rationale**: {why}
- **Evidence**: {from research}
- **Impact**: High | **Effort**: Medium

#### 2. {Feature Name} ❌ REJECTED
- **Rationale**: {why}
- **Evidence**: {from research}
- **User Reasoning**: "{user's reason for rejection}"

### Features to REMOVE
...

### Features to MODIFY
...

## Final Priority Assessment

### P0 - Must Have
1. {feature}
2. {feature}

### P1 - Should Have
1. {feature}

### P2 - Nice to Have
1. {feature}

## Differentiation Strategy

{summary of how to position against competitors}

---
*Evaluation conducted by speckit-architect (Opus 4.5)*
*User decisions recorded: {date}*

Handoff

After evaluation is complete and user approves:

  • Update spec status to evaluated
  • Next step: Phase 4 (Design Session)
  • Spec is now frozen for design phase

Key Principles

  1. User has final say - AI suggests, user decides
  2. Evidence-based - Every recommendation cites research
  3. No scope creep - Removing features is as valuable as adding
  4. Priority clarity - Clear P0/P1/P2 before design