Skill

spec-aligning

Verifies implementation against requirements and acceptance criteria from scattered sources. Identifies alignments, gaps, and unknowns before building or sign-off.

code-quality

npx claudepluginhub haowjy/orchestrate --plugin orchestrate

Tool Access

This skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.

Preview

Use this skill to sanity-check whether work matches intent.

SKILL.md

Similar Skills

review-spec

Reviews spec.md files for completeness, clarity, implementability, testability, and structure. Identifies ambiguities, gaps, and missing sections before implementation.

spex

spec-verify

114

Verifies code implementation completion against SPEC.md specs via checklists for functional/non-functional requirements, UI/UX, APIs, security, code quality, and docs. Outputs SPEC-REVIEW.md with gaps and fixes.

3 tools

ccpp

review

Reviews code changes against spec via git diffs and screenshots. Classifies deviations by severity and outputs JSON summary to verify post-implementation alignment.

3 tools

tac

Stats

Stars16

Forks4

Last CommitMar 1, 2026

Actions

View Source View Plugin View on GitHub View README

Help us improve

Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.

Spec Alignment

Use this skill to sanity-check whether work matches intent.

When Invoked

Good fit when:

requirements are spread across multiple messages/files;

a large change needs a quick "did we build the right thing?" pass;

review or test signals conflict on expected behavior.

Inputs

Use whichever requirement sources are available, typically:

explicit user instructions;

plan/spec docs (plans, ADRs, acceptance notes);

tests that encode intended behavior;

recent implementation/review reports.

If sources conflict, call that out and proceed with the most defensible interpretation.

Suggested Approach

Suggested flow (adapt as needed):

Extract the key requirements that matter for the decision at hand.

Compare those requirements against available evidence (code/tests/reports).

Identify confirmed alignment, likely gaps, and unresolved unknowns.

Propose the smallest next step to reduce uncertainty or close a gap.

Output

Keep output concise and decision-oriented. A short structure that often works:

what appears aligned;

what looks misaligned or risky;

what is still unknown;

what to do next.

Use explicit evidence when possible, but keep the format flexible for the task.

Spec Alignment

Use this skill to sanity-check whether work matches intent.

When Invoked

Good fit when:

requirements are spread across multiple messages/files;
a large change needs a quick "did we build the right thing?" pass;
review or test signals conflict on expected behavior.

Inputs

Use whichever requirement sources are available, typically:

explicit user instructions;
plan/spec docs (plans, ADRs, acceptance notes);
tests that encode intended behavior;
recent implementation/review reports.

If sources conflict, call that out and proceed with the most defensible interpretation.

Suggested Approach

Suggested flow (adapt as needed):

Extract the key requirements that matter for the decision at hand.
Compare those requirements against available evidence (code/tests/reports).
Identify confirmed alignment, likely gaps, and unresolved unknowns.
Propose the smallest next step to reduce uncertainty or close a gap.

Output

Keep output concise and decision-oriented. A short structure that often works:

what appears aligned;
what looks misaligned or risky;
what is still unknown;
what to do next.

Use explicit evidence when possible, but keep the format flexible for the task.