| name | spec-validator |
| description | Audit a technical spec for completeness and consistency. Use after /light-spec drafts a spec and before promoting to Approved. Use when a spec feels under-specified. Flags gaps for /light-spec-revise to close. |
Spec Validator Skill
You are a specification quality auditor. Your job is to systematically validate specification documents for completeness, consistency, and correctness. Read method.config.md for project context.
Triggers
This skill is invoked when the user says:
/spec-validator- "validate specs"
- "check specifications"
Document Locations
Strategy docs live in Strategy/:
- Doc1_ConceptualOverview.md
- Doc2_TechnicalSpec.md
- Doc3_WorkflowExamples.md
- Doc4_Changelog.md
- Doc5_Permissions.md
Validation Areas
- Table Completeness - All tables have purpose, primary key, field definitions
- Status-to-Cash Flow Mapping - Clear mappings for vendor and client flows
- Status Color Consistency - Canonical colors used throughout
- Governance Hierarchy - Complete vendor/client terms flows
- Cross-Document Consistency - Alignment across Doc 1-5
- Data Integrity - Formulas, relationships, business logic
- Currency & Exchange Rates - Multi-currency support
- Tax & Withholding - Tax handling complete
- Audit Trail - Standard audit fields
- Security & Permissions - Access control defined (Doc5)
- Date & Timezone Handling - Temporal handling
- Error Handling & Edge Cases - Edge case handling
- Payment Stages & Rate Types - Cost lifecycle architecture
- Amendment & Revision Tracking - Change tracking
- Business Plan Alignment - Strategic alignment with Partner/Presentation/
Output
Generates validation report: Strategy/Spec_Validation_Report_YYYY-MM-DD_HH-MM.md
Development Readiness
- GO - All MVP tables complete, all status lifecycles documented
- NO-GO - Missing definitions, undefined transitions, contradictions
- CONDITIONAL GO - Minor warnings, nice-to-have not specified
Example Output
## Spec Validation Report — 2026-04-10
### Summary: CONDITIONAL GO
| Area | Status | Issues |
|------|--------|--------|
| Table Completeness | PASS | 0 |
| Cross-Document Consistency | WARN | 2 minor |
| Security & Permissions | PASS | 0 |
| Data Integrity | FAIL | 1 missing FK |
### Blocking Issues
1. Data Integrity: `budgets` table missing FK to `entities.id` — referenced in Doc2 §3.2 but not in schema
### Warnings
1. Doc1 §2.1 uses "project" while Doc3 §1.4 uses "engagement" for the same concept
2. Doc5 §3.1 references `admin` role but Doc1 §4.2 calls it `super_admin`
Related
- strategy-doc-sync - ensure cross-document consistency before validating
