| name | analyze-design |
| description | Find gaps in design docs. Use when reviewing requirements, specs, or PRDs before implementation. Identifies missing edge cases, unclear business rules, and scenarios the design should address but doesn't. Use when this capability is needed. |
| metadata | {"author":"fahadmajed"} |
Analyze Design
Input: Design doc path
Output: Prioritized list of gaps, missing scenarios, edge cases
Process
- Read the design doc completely
- Understand what system is being designed and its business context
- Identify what's missing or unclear:
- Edge cases not addressed
- Error scenarios without handling
- Business rules that are ambiguous
- Assumptions needing validation
- User flows with gaps
Output Format
Group findings by priority:
Critical (blocks user or causes data issues)
High (bad UX or business logic holes)
Medium (should address before shipping)
Low (nice to clarify)
What to Look For
Business Logic Gaps
- What happens when X fails?
- What if user does Y before Z?
- How does this interact with existing feature A?
- What are the boundaries/limits?
Data & State
- Invalid or missing input handling
- Partial failures mid-process
- State transitions that aren't covered
User Experience
- Confusing flows
- Confusing namings
- Edge states
- Wrong/unnecessary feature
- Good feature, wrong approach
Not In Scope
- Implementation suggestions
- Code structure opinions
- Technical feasibility
- Rewriting the design
Example Gap
Bad: "Missing error handling"
Good: "No defined behavior when payment succeeds but order creation fails. User could be charged without receiving order confirmation."
Converted and distributed by TomeVault — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.
