analyze-compliance

name	analyze-compliance
description	Performs non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec, plan, and tasks. Also supports remediation mode to apply fixes. Use when running /sddp-analyze or when compliance auditing is needed.

Compliance Auditor — Analyze Compliance Workflow

- Report progress at each major milestone - **READ-ONLY during analysis**: Do NOT modify files during analysis passes (steps 0–6). Write actions are reserved exclusively for **remediation mode** (step 7). - Project instructions conflicts are automatically CRITICAL severity - Maximum 50 findings; aggregate remainder in overflow summary - Offer remediation suggestions during analysis; apply them **only** in remediation mode - This command MUST run only after `/sddp-tasks` has produced tasks.md

Mode Detection

Before starting, check if the user's prompt matches the remediation trigger (contains "Apply all suggested remediation changes from the analysis report").

• If YES → Remediation Mode: Skip steps 0–6 entirely. Jump directly to Step 7 (Remediation Execution).
• If NO → Analysis Mode: Proceed with steps 0–6 as normal, then offer remediation in step 7.

0. Acquire Skills (Analysis Mode only)

This step is skipped in Remediation Mode (which jumps to Step 7).

Read .github/skills/quality-assurance/SKILL.md to understand the Analysis Heuristics and Definition of Done. Read .github/skills/artifact-conventions/SKILL.md to understand the preservation, format, and section rules for spec artifacts. Adhere strictly to these heuristics and conventions when identifying inconsistencies.

1. Resolve Context

Determine FEATURE_DIR: infer from the current git branch (specs/<branch>/) or from user context.

Delegate: Context Gatherer in quick mode — FEATURE_DIR is the resolved path (see .github/agents/_context-gatherer.md for methodology).

• Require HAS_SPEC, HAS_PLAN, HAS_TASKS all true. If any false: ERROR — "Missing [artifact] at FEATURE_DIR/[artifact]. This file is created by [/sddp-specify, /sddp-plan, or /sddp-tasks]. Run the appropriate command to create it."
• Get the paths for spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md.

2. Parallel Detection Passes

Use specialized roles to analyze specific quality dimensions.

A. Spec Quality & Readiness

Delegate: Spec Validator (see .github/agents/_spec-validator.md for methodology):

• SpecPath: FEATURE_DIR/spec.md
• ChecklistPath: null (Run in read-only mode, do NOT generate a checklist file).
• Request a report on:
  • Duplication or near-duplicate requirements.
  • Ambiguity (vague adjectives, placeholders).
  • Underspecification.

B. Instructions Compliance

Delegate: Policy Auditor (see .github/agents/_policy-auditor.md for methodology):

• ArtifactPath: FEATURE_DIR/plan.md
• (The auditor implicitly checks against project-instructions.md).
• Request a report on strict MUST/SHOULD principles compliance.

3. Local Cross-Artifact Analysis

While detection passes run (or after they return), perform the specific cross-artifact checks that only you can do.

Load spec.md (or use validation summary). Determine spec_type from the spec.md frontmatter. If it is absent, treat it as product.

Delegate: Task Tracker (see .github/agents/_task-tracker.md for methodology):

• FEATURE_DIR: The feature directory path.
• Get structured TASK_LIST.

C. Coverage Gaps

• Requirement-to-Task: Map every requirement ID in spec.md (FR-###, TR-###, OR-###, RR-###) to tasks in TASK_LIST using the matching requirement tags in each task.
  • Use requirements field from the Task Tracker's structured output for exact matching — do NOT rely on fuzzy description matching.
  • Flag any requirement ID that has no task with a matching tag.
• Task-to-Requirement: Flag tasks that have no requirement tag and are not in Setup/Foundational/Polish phases (potential gold-plating). Treat Setup/Foundational/Polish as optional phases that may be absent.
• Non-Functional: Verify NFRs have corresponding tasks (e.g., "Performance" -> "Load test task").

D. Consistency Check

• Terminology: Check if TASK_LIST descriptions use different terms than spec.md.
• Phasing: Ensure TASK_LIST phases match plan.md architectural dependencies.
• File Paths: Verify that file paths in task descriptions match the project structure defined in plan.md's Source Code section. Flag mismatches as MEDIUM severity.

E. Artifact Convention Compliance

Apply every preservation rule, format rule, and section rule from artifact-conventions/SKILL.md (loaded in Step 0). Classify violations per its severity table.

4. Severity Assignment

Use the severity table from artifact-conventions/SKILL.md as the baseline. Add these analysis-specific rules:

Severity	Additional Analysis Criteria
CRITICAL	Violates project instructions, missing core artifact, zero-coverage requirement blocking baseline
HIGH	Duplicate/conflicting requirement (from Validator), ambiguous security/performance, untestable criterion, [X] task with no implementation artifact
MEDIUM	Terminology drift, missing non-functional coverage, underspecified edge case
LOW	Style/wording improvements, minor redundancy

5. Produce Analysis Report

Synthesize the outputs from Spec Validator, Policy Auditor, and your own Coverage/Consistency checks into a single report.

Write the complete analysis report to FEATURE_DIR/analysis-report.md. Then output a summary Markdown report:

Findings Table

ID	Category	Severity	Location(s)	Summary	Recommendation
(Combine findings from all sources)

Quality Summaries

• Spec Quality: Summary from Spec Validator (Score, key issues).
• Compliance: Summary from Auditor (Pass/Fail status).

Coverage Summary

Requirement Key	Has Task?	Task IDs	Notes

Instructions Alignment Issues (if any)

Unmapped Tasks (if any)

Metrics

• Total Requirements, Total Tasks, Coverage %, Critical Issues Count

6. Next Actions

• CRITICAL issues: recommend resolving before /sddp-implement
• LOW/MEDIUM only: user may proceed with improvement suggestions
• Suggest specific commands: /sddp-specify for refinement, /sddp-plan for architecture changes, manual edits for tasks.md coverage
• Suggest next step: /sddp-implement (required) — compose a useful suggested prompt for the user based on the current context

7. Remediation

This step behaves differently depending on the detected mode.

Autopilot guard (A1)

If AUTOPILOT = true and the current mode is Analysis Mode (not already a remediation re-invocation):

• After the analysis report is generated (Steps 0–6), immediately enter Remediation Mode without waiting for user re-invocation.
• Apply ALL recommended fixes regardless of severity (CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW).
• Skip findings that require user judgment — log them to FEATURE_DIR/autopilot-log.md: "Autopilot: Analyze — [N] findings auto-remediated, [M] skipped (require user judgment)".
• Do NOT present the "re-invoke" prompt. Proceed directly to remediation execution below, then continue to next pipeline phase.

Analysis Mode (default, when AUTOPILOT = false)

Present the analysis report (from step 5) and end with:

"To automatically apply all suggested remediation changes, re-invoke this agent with the prompt: Apply all suggested remediation changes from the analysis report"

Do NOT modify any files in this mode.

Remediation Mode (via specific prompt)

When invoked with the remediation prompt, the conversation already contains a prior analysis report.

1. Acquire Conventions: Read .github/skills/artifact-conventions/SKILL.md to understand preservation, format, and section rules before applying edits. (Step 0 was skipped in Remediation Mode, so this ensures convention awareness.)
2. Resolve Context: Use the Context Gatherer role to get FEATURE_DIR and artifact paths.
3. Parse Prior Report: Read FEATURE_DIR/analysis-report.md to extract all findings and their recommendations. If the file is missing, attempt to parse from conversation context as a fallback.
4. Apply Fixes: For each finding that has an actionable recommendation:
   • Read the target file(s) referenced in the finding's Location(s).
   • Apply the recommended edit.
   • Record what was changed.
   • Skip findings that are informational-only or require user judgment (flag them as skipped).
5. Produce Remediation Summary:

#	Finding ID	Severity	File(s) Modified	Change Applied	Status
1	...	...	...	...	Applied / Skipped

6. Report: State how many findings were remediated vs. skipped, and why any were skipped.
7. Next Step: Suggest proceeding to /sddp-implement if all CRITICAL/HIGH issues are resolved — compose a useful suggested prompt for the user based on the current context.