Skip to content

Commit 54cd79e

Browse files
Update EKS documentation for Auto Mode, Capabilities, and Atmos Auth (#901)
Co-authored-by: goruha <496956+goruha@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Igor Rodionov <goruha@gmail.com>
1 parent 9197a7f commit 54cd79e

Some content is hidden

Large Commits have some content hidden by default. Use the searchbox below for content that may be hidden.

48 files changed

+4689
-368
lines changed
Lines changed: 191 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,191 @@
1+
---
2+
name: speckit-analyze
3+
description: Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis
4+
across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
5+
compatibility: Requires spec-kit project structure with .specify/ directory
6+
metadata:
7+
author: github-spec-kit
8+
source: templates/commands/analyze.md
9+
disable-model-invocation: true
10+
---
11+
12+
## User Input
13+
14+
```text
15+
$ARGUMENTS
16+
```
17+
18+
You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
19+
20+
## Goal
21+
22+
Identify inconsistencies, duplications, ambiguities, and underspecified items across the three core artifacts (`spec.md`, `plan.md`, `tasks.md`) before implementation. This command MUST run only after `/speckit.tasks` has successfully produced a complete `tasks.md`.
23+
24+
## Operating Constraints
25+
26+
**STRICTLY READ-ONLY**: Do **not** modify any files. Output a structured analysis report. Offer an optional remediation plan (user must explicitly approve before any follow-up editing commands would be invoked manually).
27+
28+
**Constitution Authority**: The project constitution (`.specify/memory/constitution.md`) is **non-negotiable** within this analysis scope. Constitution conflicts are automatically CRITICAL and require adjustment of the spec, plan, or tasks—not dilution, reinterpretation, or silent ignoring of the principle. If a principle itself needs to change, that must occur in a separate, explicit constitution update outside `/speckit.analyze`.
29+
30+
## Execution Steps
31+
32+
### 1. Initialize Analysis Context
33+
34+
Run `.specify/scripts/bash/check-prerequisites.sh --json --require-tasks --include-tasks` once from repo root and parse JSON for FEATURE_DIR and AVAILABLE_DOCS. Derive absolute paths:
35+
36+
- SPEC = FEATURE_DIR/spec.md
37+
- PLAN = FEATURE_DIR/plan.md
38+
- TASKS = FEATURE_DIR/tasks.md
39+
40+
Abort with an error message if any required file is missing (instruct the user to run missing prerequisite command).
41+
For single quotes in args like "I'm Groot", use escape syntax: e.g 'I'\''m Groot' (or double-quote if possible: "I'm Groot").
42+
43+
### 2. Load Artifacts (Progressive Disclosure)
44+
45+
Load only the minimal necessary context from each artifact:
46+
47+
**From spec.md:**
48+
49+
- Overview/Context
50+
- Functional Requirements
51+
- Success Criteria (measurable outcomes — e.g., performance, security, availability, user success, business impact)
52+
- User Stories
53+
- Edge Cases (if present)
54+
55+
**From plan.md:**
56+
57+
- Architecture/stack choices
58+
- Data Model references
59+
- Phases
60+
- Technical constraints
61+
62+
**From tasks.md:**
63+
64+
- Task IDs
65+
- Descriptions
66+
- Phase grouping
67+
- Parallel markers [P]
68+
- Referenced file paths
69+
70+
**From constitution:**
71+
72+
- Load `.specify/memory/constitution.md` for principle validation
73+
74+
### 3. Build Semantic Models
75+
76+
Create internal representations (do not include raw artifacts in output):
77+
78+
- **Requirements inventory**: For each Functional Requirement (FR-###) and Success Criterion (SC-###), record a stable key. Use the explicit FR-/SC- identifier as the primary key when present, and optionally also derive an imperative-phrase slug for readability (e.g., "User can upload file" → `user-can-upload-file`). Include only Success Criteria items that require buildable work (e.g., load-testing infrastructure, security audit tooling), and exclude post-launch outcome metrics and business KPIs (e.g., "Reduce support tickets by 50%").
79+
- **User story/action inventory**: Discrete user actions with acceptance criteria
80+
- **Task coverage mapping**: Map each task to one or more requirements or stories (inference by keyword / explicit reference patterns like IDs or key phrases)
81+
- **Constitution rule set**: Extract principle names and MUST/SHOULD normative statements
82+
83+
### 4. Detection Passes (Token-Efficient Analysis)
84+
85+
Focus on high-signal findings. Limit to 50 findings total; aggregate remainder in overflow summary.
86+
87+
#### A. Duplication Detection
88+
89+
- Identify near-duplicate requirements
90+
- Mark lower-quality phrasing for consolidation
91+
92+
#### B. Ambiguity Detection
93+
94+
- Flag vague adjectives (fast, scalable, secure, intuitive, robust) lacking measurable criteria
95+
- Flag unresolved placeholders (TODO, TKTK, ???, `<placeholder>`, etc.)
96+
97+
#### C. Underspecification
98+
99+
- Requirements with verbs but missing object or measurable outcome
100+
- User stories missing acceptance criteria alignment
101+
- Tasks referencing files or components not defined in spec/plan
102+
103+
#### D. Constitution Alignment
104+
105+
- Any requirement or plan element conflicting with a MUST principle
106+
- Missing mandated sections or quality gates from constitution
107+
108+
#### E. Coverage Gaps
109+
110+
- Requirements with zero associated tasks
111+
- Tasks with no mapped requirement/story
112+
- Success Criteria requiring buildable work (performance, security, availability) not reflected in tasks
113+
114+
#### F. Inconsistency
115+
116+
- Terminology drift (same concept named differently across files)
117+
- Data entities referenced in plan but absent in spec (or vice versa)
118+
- Task ordering contradictions (e.g., integration tasks before foundational setup tasks without dependency note)
119+
- Conflicting requirements (e.g., one requires Next.js while other specifies Vue)
120+
121+
### 5. Severity Assignment
122+
123+
Use this heuristic to prioritize findings:
124+
125+
- **CRITICAL**: Violates constitution MUST, missing core spec artifact, or requirement with zero coverage that blocks baseline functionality
126+
- **HIGH**: Duplicate or conflicting requirement, ambiguous security/performance attribute, untestable acceptance criterion
127+
- **MEDIUM**: Terminology drift, missing non-functional task coverage, underspecified edge case
128+
- **LOW**: Style/wording improvements, minor redundancy not affecting execution order
129+
130+
### 6. Produce Compact Analysis Report
131+
132+
Output a Markdown report (no file writes) with the following structure:
133+
134+
## Specification Analysis Report
135+
136+
| ID | Category | Severity | Location(s) | Summary | Recommendation |
137+
|----|----------|----------|-------------|---------|----------------|
138+
| A1 | Duplication | HIGH | spec.md:L120-134 | Two similar requirements ... | Merge phrasing; keep clearer version |
139+
140+
(Add one row per finding; generate stable IDs prefixed by category initial.)
141+
142+
**Coverage Summary Table:**
143+
144+
| Requirement Key | Has Task? | Task IDs | Notes |
145+
|-----------------|-----------|----------|-------|
146+
147+
**Constitution Alignment Issues:** (if any)
148+
149+
**Unmapped Tasks:** (if any)
150+
151+
**Metrics:**
152+
153+
- Total Requirements
154+
- Total Tasks
155+
- Coverage % (requirements with >=1 task)
156+
- Ambiguity Count
157+
- Duplication Count
158+
- Critical Issues Count
159+
160+
### 7. Provide Next Actions
161+
162+
At end of report, output a concise Next Actions block:
163+
164+
- If CRITICAL issues exist: Recommend resolving before `/speckit.implement`
165+
- If only LOW/MEDIUM: User may proceed, but provide improvement suggestions
166+
- Provide explicit command suggestions: e.g., "Run /speckit.specify with refinement", "Run /speckit.plan to adjust architecture", "Manually edit tasks.md to add coverage for 'performance-metrics'"
167+
168+
### 8. Offer Remediation
169+
170+
Ask the user: "Would you like me to suggest concrete remediation edits for the top N issues?" (Do NOT apply them automatically.)
171+
172+
## Operating Principles
173+
174+
### Context Efficiency
175+
176+
- **Minimal high-signal tokens**: Focus on actionable findings, not exhaustive documentation
177+
- **Progressive disclosure**: Load artifacts incrementally; don't dump all content into analysis
178+
- **Token-efficient output**: Limit findings table to 50 rows; summarize overflow
179+
- **Deterministic results**: Rerunning without changes should produce consistent IDs and counts
180+
181+
### Analysis Guidelines
182+
183+
- **NEVER modify files** (this is read-only analysis)
184+
- **NEVER hallucinate missing sections** (if absent, report them accurately)
185+
- **Prioritize constitution violations** (these are always CRITICAL)
186+
- **Use examples over exhaustive rules** (cite specific instances, not generic patterns)
187+
- **Report zero issues gracefully** (emit success report with coverage statistics)
188+
189+
## Context
190+
191+
$ARGUMENTS

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)