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.
Установить с помощью моего Агента
Скопируйте этот запрос в своего Агента. Он содержит каноническую страницу Skill и манифест.
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.Ваш Агент по-прежнему должен показать план и запросить все подтверждения, требуемые политикой безопасности.
Ресурсы для AI-агентов
Используйте эти ссылки, когда AI-агенту, crawler или script нужен чистый контекст вместо полной страницы.
Протестировать
Использование «gjalla-spec-review». Review a specification that adds an administrative export endpoint without authorization details.
Ожидаемый результат:
- 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.
Использование «gjalla-spec-review». Review a design that introduces asynchronous processing but omits failure behavior.
Ожидаемый результат:
- 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.
Использование «gjalla-spec-review». Review a mature specification with complete architecture and security sections.
Ожидаемый результат:
Passes: Architecture boundaries and security controls are explicit. Recommendation: Map each acceptance criterion to a named integration or end-to-end test.
Аудит безопасности
БезопасноThe 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.
Поделиться и цитировать этот отчет
Делитесь версионным отчетом об оценке, нейтральным значком, встраиваемой карточкой и цитатами. Skillstore публикует доказательства, не решая, безопасен ли этот Skill.
Копировать ссылку на отчёт
https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-spec-review/audits/1?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_reportЗначок Markdown
[](https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-spec-review?utm_source=security_passport_badge)Значок 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>Встраиваемая карточка
<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>Академические ссылки (APA · BibTeX · CFF)
Цитата 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/1Цитата 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"
Оценка Skillstore
Почему такая оценка Достоверность доказательств: СреднийЧто вы можете построить
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.
Попробуйте эти промпты
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]
Лучшие практики
- 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.
Избегать
- 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.