本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

vibe-gap-analysis

Assesses production readiness or audits a codebase against its specs. Supports quick static mode, deep 17-dimension audit, or single-dimension focus. Use before a production launch, after a major refactor, when inheriting a codebase, or when someone asks how done the project is.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md6.0 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

vibe-gap-analysis

Cynical gap analysis comparing specs/architecture to actual implementation. Three modes from fast to exhaustive. Works with any project that has architecture docs and implementation code.

When to Use This Skill

  • Before launching to production
  • After a major refactor to verify nothing was lost
  • When inheriting a codebase and need to assess completeness
  • Periodic production readiness audits
  • When stakeholders ask "how done are we?"

When NOT to Use This Skill

  • Greenfield projects with no specs yet (write specs first)
  • Simple bug fixes or feature additions
  • Frontend-only or design-only reviews

Usage

/vibe-gap-analysis              # Quick static (5 structural dimensions)
/vibe-gap-analysis --deep       # Full 17-dimension audit with parallel agents
/vibe-gap-analysis --dim N      # Single dimension deep-dive (1-17)
/vibe-gap-analysis --dim 1,4,9  # Multiple specific dimensions

Modes

Quick Static (default)

Fast, single-agent structural audit. No subagents dispatched.

  1. Read architecture/design docs in docs/ or similar
  2. Read implementation code in src/, internal/, lib/ etc.
  3. Compare implementation against architecture doc section by section
  4. Cover dimensions 1-5 (structural):
    • Dim 1: Spec Compliance — check specs against implementation
    • Dim 2: Backend Code Quality — test coverage, error handling, lint issues
    • Dim 3: Frontend Completeness — UI components, routes, test coverage
    • Dim 4: Deployment & Ops — deploy scripts, CI/CD, Docker, TLS
    • Dim 5: Architecture Integrity — design pattern compliance, component boundaries
  5. Produce structured gap report: component, expected status, actual status, % complete, action items
  6. Save to docs/plans/gap-analysis-$(date +%Y%m%d).md
  7. Commit with docs: gap analysis $(date +%Y%m%d)

Deep (--deep)

Full 17-dimension audit using parallel subagents where the harness supports them (Claude Code, Codex, and Gemini CLI all can). Without subagents, run the dimensions sequentially. Exhaustive production readiness assessment.

Dispatch parallel agents in 3 rounds. Subagents inherit the session's model by default; if the harness lets you choose, a faster or cheaper tier is fine for the scanning rounds, but keep the most capable model for merging and scoring.

Round 1 — Structural (5 agents):

  • Dim 1: Spec Compliance
  • Dim 2: Backend Code Quality
  • Dim 3: Frontend Completeness
  • Dim 4: Deployment & Ops
  • Dim 5: Architecture Integrity

Round 2 — Runtime Execution (7 agents):

  • Dim 6: Database Concurrency & Integrity
  • Dim 7: Failure Cascades & Recovery
  • Dim 8: E2E Data Flow
  • Dim 9: Security & Input Validation
  • Dim 10: Observability & Alerting
  • Dim 11: Data Durability & Backup
  • Dim 12: Cost/Resource Explosion Safeguards

Round 3 — Business & Product Maturity (5 agents):

  • Dim 13: Performance & Load Testing
  • Dim 14: Multi-Tenancy / User Isolation
  • Dim 15: Privacy & Compliance (GDPR/CCPA)
  • Dim 16: Supply Chain Security
  • Dim 17: Operational Readiness

Each agent gets this prompt template:

You are auditing [project] for production readiness.

**Your dimension:** [Dimension N — Name]
**Scope:** [Description]
**Previous gap analysis:** [path, if exists]

Instructions:
1. Read all relevant source files for your dimension
2. For each finding: severity (CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW), location (file:line), issue, fix, effort
3. Score your dimension 0-100
4. Return findings as structured markdown

Be pedantic and skeptical, and calibrate severity to this project's actual stakes.
Report only findings you can point to with file:line evidence; mark anything inferred as "unverified".

After all rounds:

  1. Merge findings, deduplicate across dimensions
  2. Build production readiness scorecard (17 dimensions)
  3. Build findings-by-system-area cross-reference
  4. Build recommended action plan (phased)
  5. Save and commit

Single Dimension (--dim N)

Deep-dive into specific dimensions. One agent per requested dimension.

After completion, update only the audited dimensions in the existing gap analysis doc.

Dimension Reference

#DimensionTypeWhat to Audit
1Spec ComplianceStructuralSpecs vs implementation
2Backend Code QualityStructuralTests, errors, lint, races
3Frontend CompletenessStructuralUI, routes, stores, tests
4Deployment & OpsStructuralDeploy, CI/CD, Docker, TLS
5Architecture IntegrityStructuralDesign patterns, boundaries
6Database ConcurrencyRuntimeTransactions, locks, backups
7Failure CascadesRuntimeRecovery, circuit breakers
8E2E Data FlowRuntimeAPI contracts, idempotency
9SecurityRuntimeInput validation, injection, secrets
10ObservabilityRuntimeLogging, alerting, metrics
11Data DurabilityRuntimeRPO/RTO, backups, replication
12Cost/Resource ControlRuntimeBudgets, limits, rate limiting
13Performance & LoadBusinessTimeouts, benchmarks, limits
14Multi-TenancyBusinessUser isolation, data scoping
15Privacy & ComplianceBusinessGDPR, PII, consent, encryption
16Supply ChainBusinessDep pinning, vuln scanning, builds
17Operational ReadinessBusinessRunbooks, SLOs, incident response

Output Format

All modes produce:

  • Executive summary with total findings count
  • Audit dimensions table with scores
  • CRITICAL findings (full detail)
  • HIGH findings (full detail)
  • MEDIUM findings (one-line each)
  • LOW findings (one-line each)
  • Findings by system area (cross-reference)
  • Recommended action plan (phased)
  • Production readiness scorecard

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Validates completed work against defined acceptance criteria. Use after completing a task that has specific success criteria defined in issues, specs, or task descriptions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

ash1794/vibe-engineering1642026年10月8日 更新

Generates edge case, failure mode, and spec-driven test cases. Covers boundary values, nil inputs, concurrency, resource exhaustion, malformed data, and requirement-linked traceability tests. Use after happy-path tests exist and before claiming coverage is complete, when requirements lack tests, or before a security review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

ash1794/vibe-engineering1642026年10月8日 更新

Catches shortcuts and reward hacking — weakening or deleting tests to make them pass, hard-coding expected outputs, silently dropping requirements, or claiming work is done without running it. Use before declaring a task complete and whenever a test or requirement feels like it's in the way.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

ash1794/vibe-engineering1642026年10月8日 更新

Safely integrates commits from parallel agent branches using sequential cherry-pick. Use after parallel work completes in isolated branches or worktrees.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

ash1794/vibe-engineering1642026年10月8日 更新

Audits tests for concurrency safety — race conditions, shared mock state, cleanup ordering. Use when writing tests that involve goroutines, async operations, or shared mutable state.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

ash1794/vibe-engineering1642026年10月8日 更新

Enforces tiered test coverage standards with three dimensions — line coverage by tier, spec-to-test traceability, and spec-to-code implementation mapping. Use before claiming code is complete.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

ash1794/vibe-engineering1642026年10月8日 更新

ash1794 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する