validate

Solid

Interactive technical design quality review and validation. Use when reviewing design before implementation.

AI & Automation 81 stars 9 forks Updated 6 days ago AGPL-3.0

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 88/100

Stars 20%
64
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
80
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# kiro-validate-design Skill ## Role You are a specialized skill for conducting interactive quality review of technical design to ensure readiness for implementation. ## Core Mission - **Mission**: Conduct interactive quality review of technical design to ensure readiness for implementation - **Success Criteria**: - Critical issues identified (maximum 3 most important concerns) - Balanced assessment with strengths recognized - Clear GO/NO-GO decision with rationale - Actionable feedback for improvements if needed ## Execution Steps ### Step 1: Gather Context If steering/spec context is already available from conversation, skip redundant file reads. Otherwise, load all necessary context: - Read `.kiro/specs/{feature}/spec.json` for language and metadata - Read `.kiro/specs/{feature}/requirements.md` for requirements - Read `.kiro/specs/{feature}/design.md` for design document - Core steering context: `product.md`, `tech.md`, `structure.md` - Additional steering files only when directly relevant to architecture boundaries, integrations, runtime prerequisites, domain rules, security/performance constraints, or team conventions that affect implementation readiness - Relevant local agent skills or playbooks only when they clearly match the feature's host environment or use case and provide review-relevant context #### Parallel Research The following research areas are independent and can be executed in parallel: 1. **Context & rules loading**: Spec documents, core s...

Details

Author
X-isdoingreat
Repository
X-isdoingreat/canvas-pilot
Created
2 months ago
Last Updated
6 days ago
Language
Python
License
AGPL-3.0

Integrates with

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Listed

validation

This skill should be used when the user asks to "validate requirements", "review requirements quality", "check requirements completeness", "verify traceability", "check INVEST compliance", "validate user stories", "requirements health check", "quality gate check", or when running /re:review validation.

3 Updated today
mamiaijf
Code & Development Solid

design-review

UI/UX design consistency audit. Code-based DX1-DX20 checklist covering states, consistency, accessibility, responsive behavior, and interaction patterns. Optional visual audit via chrome-devtools screenshots and automated WCAG accessibility via axe-core. DAP1-DAP12 anti-pattern detection. Modes: [path], visual, --fix-critical, --dry-run, --max-files, --quick, loop. NOT for code quality (use zuvo:code-audit) or test quality (use zuvo:test-audit).

6 Updated today
greglas75
AI & Automation Solid

unikit-gd-review

Qualitative quality review of game design documents — answers "is this design good, and does it follow best practices?" — across all three GDD axes: systems, flows, and content types. Fans out adversarial lenses (completeness, clarity, pillar alignment, systems-math, fantasy-delivery, feasibility, scope) plus domain lenses that check it against the game-design rules, each prompted to find problems rather than validate; produces a severity-graded verdict and a two-bucket report (apply-ready fixes vs research), handed to /unikit-gd-apply or /unikit-gd-explore in one move. Scope is inferred: a named system, flow, or content type reviews that document; "all" runs a cross-document review. Use when the user wants a critique, quality judgment, or rules check of the design, e.g. "review the combat GDD", "review the onboarding flow". This is the subjective quality pass — for a mechanical consistency check (numbers, terms, IDs, references matching the registry) use /unikit-gd-verify.

16 Updated 4 days ago
NintendaDev