Creates detailed story specification files from various inputs (Claude plan, requirement file, prompt, GitHub issue). Discovers project spec conventions at runtime, brainstorms approaches with vertical splitting recommendations for large stories, generates template-compliant specs, checks for over-engineering, and optionally chains to spec-review. Use when: (1) user wants to write a new story spec, (2) converting a plan or requirements into a formal spec, (3) creating specs from GitHub issues, (4) breaking a large feature into shippable vertical slices.
Implements a previously created and reviewed story spec end-to-end: reads the spec, creates a feature branch, implements all sub-tasks with progress tracking, validates acceptance criteria, updates tracking files, and creates a PR. Optionally delegates to separately-installed brainstorming, frontend-design, and ui-from-requirements skills for complex UI work. Use when: (1) user says /spec-implement or 'implement this spec', (2) a story spec has been created and reviewed and is ready for implementation, (3) user provides a spec file path to implement.
Reviews and enriches story specifications with codebase-verified technical sub-tasks, architecture alignment checks, design simplification suggestions, and API test plans. Dynamically discovers project architecture at runtime. Use when: (1) a new story spec needs review before implementation, (2) a spec has high-level tasks but lacks implementation-ready detail, (3) need to verify spec assumptions against actual codebase, (4) a spec references API changes but has no test plan, (5) reviewing specs that reference data shapes or pipeline ordering, (6) spec subtasks mention add field X to object Y or call function at line N.
Creates detailed story specification files from various inputs (Claude plan, requirement file, prompt, GitHub issue). Discovers project spec conventions at runtime, brainstorms approaches with vertical splitting recommendations for large stories, generates template-compliant specs, checks for over-engineering, and optionally chains to spec-review. Use when: (1) user wants to write a new story spec, (2) converting a plan or requirements into a formal spec, (3) creating specs from GitHub issues, (4) breaking a large feature into shippable vertical slices.
Implements a previously created and reviewed story spec end-to-end: reads the spec, creates a feature branch, implements all sub-tasks with progress tracking, validates acceptance criteria, updates tracking files, and creates a PR. Optionally delegates to separately-installed brainstorming, frontend-design, and ui-from-requirements skills for complex UI work. Use when: (1) user says /spec-implement or 'implement this spec', (2) a story spec has been created and reviewed and is ready for implementation, (3) user provides a spec file path to implement.
Reviews and enriches story specifications with codebase-verified technical sub-tasks, architecture alignment checks, design simplification suggestions, and API test plans. Dynamically discovers project architecture at runtime. Use when: (1) a new story spec needs review before implementation, (2) a spec has high-level tasks but lacks implementation-ready detail, (3) need to verify spec assumptions against actual codebase, (4) a spec references API changes but has no test plan, (5) reviewing specs that reference data shapes or pipeline ordering, (6) spec subtasks mention add field X to object Y or call function at line N.
Use when the user wants a thorough, high-assurance review of code changes — phrases like "review this until it's clean", "converge to zero issues", "adversarial review", "have Gemini and Claude review", "deep review this PR", or "make this change ironclad". Runs TWO phases on a PR or working-tree diff: (1) iterative multi-reviewer review that loops fix->re-review until a round finds zero actionable issues, then (2) a multi-round Gemini-primary adversarial cross-examination (Gemini finds -> Claude judges -> Gemini counters), fixing every confirmed finding. Repeatable across any project/PR. Use when: (1) the user wants a thorough, high-assurance review that converges to zero actionable issues, (2) the user asks for an adversarial or Gemini-and-Claude cross-examination review of a code diff, (3) deep-reviewing a PR or working-tree diff before merge, (4) the user wants to make a change ironclad.
Runs a Claude↔Gemini adversarial code review on a PR diff or working-tree diff, surfacing only findings both models independently confirm (high-precision, both-confirm rule). Use when: (1) reviewing a PR or working-tree diff with adversarial rigor and you want fewer false positives, (2) you want only findings two independent AI models agree on rather than a single-model opinion, (3) replacing a lost external PR reviewer (e.g. Copilot) with a second independent model cross-examining Claude's analysis, (4) running a high-precision pre-merge review before shipping to production. Supports automatic PR mode (posts review comments) and local mode (terminal report + gitignored markdown file). Degrades loudly to Claude-only review when Gemini is unavailable.