Home/AI Code Generation & Quality/check-impl-against-spec
C

check-impl-against-spec

by @warpdotdevv
4.5(120)

This skill automatically compares a pull request's implementation against its technical specification during code review, identifying and reporting any material mismatches. It significantly reduces manual review effort, ensuring code adheres strictly to design requirements, thereby enhancing project quality and development efficiency. Particularly useful in development processes requiring strict adherence to specifications.

code-reviewspec-compliancequality-assurancepr-automationdevelopment-workflowGitHub
Installation
npx skills add https://github.com/warpdotdev/common-skills --skill check-impl-against-spec
compare_arrows

Before / After Comparison

1 组
Before

Without this skill, developers had to manually compare code implementation against lengthy technical specification documents line by line, which was time-consuming, labor-intensive, and prone to missing critical differences, leading to potential quality issues and rework.

After

This skill automatically and efficiently compares code with specifications, quickly identifying material mismatches. It significantly reduces manual review time, ensures code quality and specification consistency, and accelerates the PR approval process.

SKILL.md

Check implementation against spec

Use this skill only when spec_context.md exists during PR review.

Goal

Determine whether the implementation in the checked-out PR materially matches the approved spec context. This is a supplement to the normal code review, not a separate output.

Inputs

  • spec_context.md contains the spec context to compare against. It may include both product spec content (intended behavior, acceptance criteria) and tech spec content (implementation details, file changes).
  • pr_diff.txt contains the annotated diff for the PR.
  • pr_description.md may contain additional scope or rationale.
  • The working tree contains the PR branch contents.

Process

  1. Read spec_context.md and extract the concrete commitments it makes:
    • required behaviors (from the product spec)
    • required files or subsystems to change (from the tech spec)
    • stated constraints
    • required follow-up steps, validation, or migrations
  2. Compare those commitments against the actual implementation in pr_diff.txt and the checked-out files.
  3. Treat small implementation-level adjustments as acceptable when they preserve the spec's intent. Do not flag harmless differences in naming, structure, or low-level technique.
  4. Flag a mismatch only when it is material, such as:
    • required behavior in the product spec is missing
    • the implementation contradicts a spec decision
    • the change introduces significant unplanned scope
    • a required validation, migration, or compatibility step from the tech spec is absent

Outputs

  • Do not create a separate report file.
  • Fold spec-alignment findings into review.json.
  • Put broad spec-drift concerns in the review summary.
  • Add inline comments only when the mismatch can be tied to changed lines in the diff.
  • Treat material spec drift as at least an important concern.
  • If the implementation matches the spec closely enough, do not add comments just to mention alignment.

Boundaries

  • Do not require literal one-to-one implementation of the spec when the PR achieves the same outcome safely.
  • Do not speculate about spec details that are not actually present in spec_context.md.
  • Do not post to GitHub directly.

User Reviews (0)

Write a Review

Effect
Usability
Docs
Compatibility

No reviews yet

Statistics

Installs9.5K
Rating4.5 / 5.0
Version
Updated2026年7月9日
Comparisons1

User Rating

4.5(120)
5
37%
4
43%
3
13%
2
5%
1
2%

Rate this Skill

0.0

Compatible Platforms

🤖claude-code

Timeline

Created2026年6月9日
Last Updated2026年7月9日
🎁 Agent Knowledge Cards
Survey