gjalla-spec-review
Review Software Specifications Before Implementation
Ambiguous specifications create implementation gaps, security risks, and costly rework. This skill reviews plans through architecture, security, quality, user, and governance perspectives before engineers begin implementation.
Installer avec mon Agent
Copiez cette demande dans votre Agent. Elle contient la page Skill de référence et le manifeste.
Review the Skillstore skill "gjalla-spec-review" from https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-spec-review.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/gjalla-gjalla-spec-review/manifest. Verify the artifact. You may proceed after verification, subject to the environment's own policy.Votre Agent doit toujours présenter son plan et demander toute confirmation exigée par la politique de sécurité.
Ressources lisibles par les agents
Utilisez ces liens lorsqu’un Agent IA, un crawler ou un script a besoin d’un contexte propre au lieu de lire toute la page.
Tester
Utilisation de « gjalla-spec-review ». Review a specification that adds an administrative export endpoint without authorization details.
RĂ©sultat attendu:
- Blocking concern: The specification does not define authorization for the administrative export endpoint.
- Required change: Name the allowed roles, enforcement point, denied behavior, and audit logging requirements.
- Verification: Add positive and negative authorization tests for every supported role.
Utilisation de « gjalla-spec-review ». Review a design that introduces asynchronous processing but omits failure behavior.
RĂ©sultat attendu:
- Architecture risk: Retry ownership, idempotency, ordering, and dead-letter handling are unspecified.
- User risk: The specification does not explain delayed completion or permanent failure.
- Recommendation: Define retry limits, status visibility, recovery procedures, and acceptance tests.
Utilisation de « gjalla-spec-review ». Review a mature specification with complete architecture and security sections.
RĂ©sultat attendu:
Passes: Architecture boundaries and security controls are explicit. Recommendation: Map each acceptance criterion to a named integration or end-to-end test.
Audit de sécurité
SûrThe sole static finding is a false positive caused by benign wording about reviewing a specification from multiple expert perspectives. The skill contains only review guidance and shows no malicious intent, prompt injection, or operational security behavior.
Partager et citer ce rapport
Partagez le rapport d’évaluation versionné, le badge neutre, la carte intégrable et les citations. Skillstore présente les preuves sans décider si ce Skill est sûr.
Copier le lien du rapport
https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-spec-review/audits/1?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_reportBadge Markdown
[](https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-spec-review?utm_source=security_passport_badge)Badge HTML
<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-spec-review?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/gjalla-gjalla-spec-review/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>Carte intégrable
<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/gjalla-gjalla-spec-review.html" title="Skillstore Security Assessment" sandbox="allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer" width="420" height="180"></iframe>Citations académiques (APA · BibTeX · CFF)
Citation APA
gjalla. (2026). gjalla-spec-review security audit report (audit version 1) [Author version unspecified]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-spec-review/audits/1Citation BibTeX
@techreport{gjalla-gjalla-gjalla-spec-review-2026,
author = {gjalla},
title = {gjalla-spec-review security audit report (audit version 1)},
institution = {Skillstore},
year = {2026},
number = {1},
url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-spec-review/audits/1},
note = {Author version unspecified}
}CITATION.cff
cff-version: 1.2.0
message: "If you use this Skill, cite its author and this versioned security audit report."
title: "gjalla-spec-review security audit report (audit version 1)"
version: "unspecified"
type: report
authors:
- name: "gjalla"
date-released: "2026-08-11"
url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-spec-review/audits/1"
identifiers:
- type: other
value: "skillstore:gjalla-gjalla-spec-review:audit:1"
description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"
Score Skillstore
Pourquoi ce score Niveau de confiance des preuves: MoyenCe que vous pouvez créer
Prepare an Engineering Handoff
Review a feature specification for missing decisions, unclear acceptance criteria, and implementation risks before assigning development work.
Strengthen a Technical Design
Check architecture boundaries, integration patterns, security controls, and testing plans before requesting design approval.
Validate Product Readiness
Assess user outcomes, failure handling, discoverability, and documentation requirements before committing a feature to delivery.
Essayez ces prompts
Review this specification using the five defined perspectives. List blocking concerns, recommendations, and concrete changes needed before implementation: [paste specification]
Review this draft specification. Identify missing decisions and assumptions, then propose testable acceptance criteria: [paste draft and relevant project context]
Review this cross-system design against these architecture rules. Trace integration, data flow, ownership, security, testing, and governance risks: [design] [rules]
Perform a final specification review using this project context. Prioritize blockers, explain impact, propose exact revisions, and define verification criteria: [specification] [context]
Bonnes pratiques
- Provide the complete specification, relevant architecture rules, and known project constraints.
- Resolve blocking concerns before using recommendations to improve clarity and maintainability.
- Convert every approved revision into measurable acceptance criteria and verification steps.
Éviter
- Do not request a definitive review from a short summary that omits system context.
- Do not treat recommendations as mandatory without considering project priorities and tradeoffs.
- Do not accept broad statements such as secure or well tested without measurable criteria.