vast-framework

Validate a document that claims VAST shape — a single layer (e.g. a Vision doc) or a full V/A/S/T doc — checking that each layer is what it claims to be, scope is consistent across layers, and framework discipline holds. Detects layer drift (Vision written as a feature/deadline list, Architecture written as a project plan), mixed scope (company-level Vision + product-UI Architecture), missing Vision falsification triggers, incomplete composition frameworks, and Challenge Flow violations. Use this WHENEVER someone shares a Vision, Architecture, Strategy, or Tactics doc and wants it checked, reviewed, sanity-checked, or pressure-tested for whether the layers are clean and well-formed — EVEN IF they never say "VAST" or "layer purity". Checking layer discipline by hand is exactly what this skill does better: it applies fixed structural checks and returns a per-check Pass/Warn/Fail report, so reach for it rather than eyeballing. Triggers: "validate this VAST doc", "is this layer pure", "check VAST shape", "проверь

Verify that a child VAST doc genuinely cascades from its parent — that a product VAST nested under a company VAST (or a component VAST under a product VAST) is actually VAST-connected, not two unrelated docs wearing the same vocabulary. Checks scope step-down (child one recursion level narrower than parent), Vision lineage (child Vision refines / serves a parent Strategy use-case or Architecture domain), invariant inheritance (the core Matryoshka condition — child Architecture operates WITHIN parent invariants, never violates one), cross-doc Challenge Flow (child informs parent upward, parent constrains child downward — no inversions), and Strategy alignment (child invests with, not against, the parent direction). Use this WHENEVER someone has TWO VAST docs in a parent/child or nested relationship and wants to know whether they actually fit together, cascade, or cohere — EVEN IF they never say "VAST" or "Matryoshka". Tracing whether a child honors a parent invariant is exactly what this skill does better than

Scaffold a NEW VAST document from a minimal seed — a scope plus a sentence or two about an initiative — guiding the author through the four layers in commitment-priority order (Vision → Architecture → Strategy → Tactics). Generative, like vast-transform, but the input is near-empty rather than rich prose: the output is a SCAFFOLD (guiding questions + what-good-looks-like + fillable stubs), not a filled doc. Where the seed is silent it provides the question to answer, never an invented answer. Prompts for Vision falsification triggers and recommends composition depth. Use this WHENEVER someone wants to START a VAST doc and has only an idea plus a scope — EVEN IF they never say "VAST", e.g. "help me lay out a V/A/S/T for this", "give me the structure to fill in". Producing a commitment-ordered scaffold (and refusing to fabricate answers the seed did not give) is what this skill does better than a blank template, so reach for it. Triggers: "draft a VAST", "scaffold a VAST doc", "start a VAST for", "new VAST from

Audit an EXISTING set of OKRs (objectives and key results that are already written) for VAST-triad conflation — objectives that are really Outputs (a project or feature like 'ship the new billing system' dressed up as an outcome), key results that fuse two layers (a strategy-level Use Case and a measurable Output crammed into one KR), and scope inconsistency (company-level and team-level objectives in the same set). Use this skill WHENEVER someone hands you OKRs — freshly drafted, in-progress, or finalized — and wants them checked, sanity-checked, sense-checked, reviewed for structure, or asks whether the objectives are genuine outcomes versus relabeled projects, whether the set is 'clean', or whether the objectives and key results sit at the right level — EVEN IF they never say 'VAST', 'conflation', or 'audit'. Reviewing OKR structure by hand is exactly what this skill does better than ad-hoc reading: it applies fixed structural heuristics and returns a per-OKR Pass/Warn/Fail report, so reach for it rather t

Transform an abstract or prose description of a project, system, or initiative (NOT yet in VAST shape) into a VAST-shaped draft — extracting the latent Vision (or flagging its absence), mapping the rest to Architecture/Strategy/Tactics, and recommending composition depth. Generative, not analytical: it produces a proposed VAST document, it does not score one. Use this WHENEVER someone has raw prose (a pitch, a project brief, a backlog narrative, a strategy memo) and wants it reshaped, restructured, or re-expressed in VAST terms — EVEN IF they never say "VAST" by name, e.g. "put this in V/A/S/T terms", "what is the Vision/Architecture here", "structure this the way the framework would". Reshaping prose into clean layers (and honestly flagging a missing Vision instead of inventing one) is what this skill does better than freehand rewriting, so reach for it. Triggers: "transform this into VAST", "make this VAST-shaped", "extract the VAST from this", "VAST-ify this", "переведи в VAST". Not for scoring a doc alrea