Skill

tech-spec:review

Reviews technical specifications using expert personas to identify gaps, risks, and missing considerations. Verifies claims against repositories, discusses resolutions, and applies updates.

documentation

code-quality

Install

npx claudepluginhub bendrucker/claude --plugin tech-spec

Tool Access

This skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.

Preview

Ask the user to provide:

Supporting Assets

references/experts.md

SKILL.md

Similar Skills

design-system

Generates design tokens/docs from CSS/Tailwind/styled-components codebases, audits visual consistency across 10 dimensions, detects AI slop in UI.

team-skills-platform

167.4k

ui-demo

Records polished WebM UI demo videos of web apps using Playwright with cursor overlay, natural pacing, and three-phase scripting. Activates for demo, walkthrough, screen recording, or tutorial requests.

team-skills-platform

167.4k

kotlin-patterns

Delivers idiomatic Kotlin patterns for null safety, immutability, sealed classes, coroutines, Flows, extensions, DSL builders, and Gradle DSL. Use when writing, reviewing, refactoring, or designing Kotlin code.

team-skills-platform

167.4k

Stats

Parent Repo Stars10

Parent Repo Forks1

Last CommitFeb 8, 2026

Actions

View Source View Plugin View on GitHub View README

Review Technical Specification

Inputs

Ask the user to provide:

Tech spec: Path to the specification file, or pasted content
Focus areas (optional): Specific concerns to prioritize (e.g., "security", "API design")
Repositories (optional): Codebases to consult when verifying spec claims

Code Exploration

When repositories are provided, consult code to verify:

Proposed patterns match existing conventions
Referenced files and structures exist
Implementation assumptions are accurate

Explore on demand during review rather than upfront.

Review Process

Identify Expert Perspectives

Select relevant personas from references/experts.md:

Always include standard personas (security, API, database, etc.)
Add dynamic personas based on spec content (integrations, analytics, etc.)
User-specified focus areas get priority

Conduct Review

For each relevant persona:

Scan the spec for areas within their expertise
Identify findings: gaps, risks, unclear decisions, missing considerations
Rate severity: blocking, important, or nice-to-have

Present Findings

Group related findings into batches and present via AskUserQuestion:

Batch by persona or topic when findings cluster naturally
Present individually when no natural grouping exists
Include severity and recommendations

Interview for Resolution

For findings with meaningful trade-offs:

Discuss alternatives with the user
Capture decisions in the Design Decisions table
Update the spec with resolutions

Update Spec

Apply agreed changes directly to the spec file:

Add missing sections or considerations
Expand the Design Decisions table
Clarify ambiguous areas