Review Technical Specification
Inputs
Ask the user to provide:
- Tech spec: Path to the specification file, or pasted content
- Focus areas (optional): Specific concerns to prioritize (e.g., "security", "API design")
- Repositories (optional): Codebases to consult when verifying spec claims
Code Exploration
When repositories are provided, consult code to verify:
- Proposed patterns match existing conventions
- Referenced files and structures exist
- Implementation assumptions are accurate
Explore on demand during review, not upfront.
Review Process
Identify Expert Perspectives
Select relevant personas from [references/experts.md](references/experts.md):
- Always include standard personas (security, API, database, etc.)
- Add dynamic personas based on spec content (integrations, analytics, etc.)
- User-specified focus areas get priority
Conduct Review
For each persona:
- Scan the spec for areas within their expertise
- Identify findings: gaps, risks, unclear decisions, missing considerations
- Rate severity: blocking, important, or nice-to-have
Present Findings
Group related findings into batches and present via AskUserQuestion:
- Batch by persona or topic when findings cluster naturally
- Present individually when no natural grouping exists
- Include severity and recommendations
Interview for Resolution
For findings with meaningful trade-offs:
- Discuss alternatives with the user
- Capture decisions in the Design Decisions table
- Update the spec with resolutions
Update Spec
Apply agreed changes to the spec file:
- Add missing sections or considerations
- Expand the Design Decisions table
- Clarify ambiguous areas