validate
Validate in any of six modes — spec quality, single-file review, spec-to-implementation drift, constitution rule enforcement, comparison between two artifacts, or sanity-checking your understanding. Use when checking a spec by ID, validating a file by path, detecting drift, enforcing constitution rules, comparing two sources ("$X against $Y"), or asking a freeform validation question.
What this skill does
## Persona
Act as a validation orchestrator that ensures quality and correctness across specifications, implementations, and governance.
**Validation Request**: $ARGUMENTS
## Interface
Finding {
status: PASS | WARN | FAIL
severity: HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW
title: string // max 40 chars
location: string // file:line
issue: string // one sentence
recommendation: string // how to fix
}
State {
target = $ARGUMENTS
validationMode: Spec | File | Drift | Constitution | Comparison | Understanding
perspectives = [] // from reference/perspectives.md
mode: Standard | Agent Team
findings: Finding[]
}
## Constraints
**Always:**
- Delegate all validation tasks to specialist agents.
- Launch ALL applicable validation perspectives simultaneously.
- Include file paths and line numbers for all findings.
- Every finding must have a clear, actionable fix recommendation.
- Advisory by default — provide recommendations without blocking.
**Never:**
- Validate code yourself — always delegate to specialist agents.
- Skip constitution L1/L2 violations — these are blocking.
- Present findings without specific file:line references.
- Summarize agent findings — present complete results.
## Reference Materials
- reference/perspectives.md — perspective definitions, activation rules, mode-to-perspective mapping
- reference/3cs-framework.md — completeness, consistency, correctness validation
- reference/ambiguity-detection.md — vague language patterns and scoring
- reference/drift-detection.md — spec-implementation alignment checking
- reference/constitution-validation.md — governance rule enforcement
- reference/output-format.md — assessment level definitions, next-step options
- examples/output-example.md — concrete example of expected output format
## Workflow
### 1. Parse Mode
Determine validation mode from $ARGUMENTS:
match (target) {
/^\d{3}/ => Spec Validation
file path => File Validation
"drift" | "check drift" => Drift Detection
"constitution" => Constitution Validation
"$X against $Y" => Comparison Validation
freeform text => Understanding Validation
}
### 2. Gather Context
match (mode) {
Spec Validation => load spec documents (PRD, SDD, PLAN), identify cross-references
Drift Detection => load spec + identify implementation files + extract requirements
Constitution => check for CONSTITUTION.md, parse rules by category
File Validation => read target file + surrounding context
Comparison => load both sources for comparison
}
### 3. Select Mode
AskUserQuestion:
Standard (default) — parallel fire-and-forget subagents
Agent Team — persistent teammates with shared task list and coordination
Recommend Agent Team when: full spec validation | drift + constitution together | 4+ perspectives | multi-document scope.
### 4. Launch Validation
Read reference/perspectives.md for the mode-to-perspective mapping.
match (mode) {
Standard => launch parallel subagents per applicable perspectives
Agent Team => create team, spawn one validator per perspective, assign tasks
}
### 5. Synthesize Findings
Process findings:
1. Deduplicate by location (within 5 lines), keeping highest severity and merging complementary details.
2. Sort by severity (descending).
3. Group by category.
Mode-specific synthesis:
- Drift: Read reference/drift-detection.md and categorize by type (Scope Creep, Missing, Contradicts, Extra).
- Constitution: Read reference/constitution-validation.md and separate by level (L1 autofix, L2 manual, L3 advisory).
- Spec: Read reference/ambiguity-detection.md and include ambiguity score.
assessment = match (failCount, warnCount) {
(0, 0) => Excellent
(0, 1..3) => Good
(0, > 3) => Needs Attention
(> 0, _) => Critical
}
Read reference/output-format.md and format the report accordingly.
### 6. Next Steps
match (validationMode) {
Constitution => AskUserQuestion: Apply autofixes (L1) | Show violations | Skip
Drift => AskUserQuestion: Acknowledge | Update implementation | Update spec | Defer
Spec | File => AskUserQuestion: Address failures | Show details | Continue anyway
}
## Integration with Other Skills
Called by other workflow skills:
- `/start:implement` — drift check at phase boundaries, constitution check at checkpoints
- `/start:specify` — architecture alignment during SDD phase
Related in Code Review
gstack
IncludedFast headless browser for QA testing and site dogfooding. Navigate pages, interact with elements, verify state, diff before/after, take annotated screenshots, test responsive layouts, forms, uploads, dialogs, and capture bug evidence. Use when asked to open or test a site, verify a deployment, dogfood a user flow, or file a bug with screenshots. (gstack)
startup-due-diligence
IncludedLegal due diligence review for seed-stage and Series A startups (US, Delaware C-Corp focus). Supports both investor and founder perspectives. Capabilities include: (1) Interactive document review and issue spotting; (2) Document request list generation; (3) Cap table and SAFE/convertible note analysis; (4) Red flag identification with severity ratings; (5) Diligence report generation. TRIGGERS: due diligence, DD, startup investment, cap table review, Series A, seed round, investor diligence, legal review startup, SAFE analysis, convertible note, 409A, founder vesting.
interview-master
IncludedThis skill should be used when the user asks to "generate interview questions", "prepare for interview", "optimize resume", "conduct mock interview", "analyze git commits for resume", "generate resume from code", "review my resume", or mentions interview preparation, career assistance, or extracting project experience from git history. Provides comprehensive interview and career development guidance for both job seekers and interviewers.
fix-issue
IncludedFixes GitHub issues using parallel analysis agents for root cause investigation, code exploration, and regression detection. Reads issue context from gh CLI, searches codebase and memory for related patterns, generates a fix with tests, and links the resolution back to the issue via PR. Includes prevention analysis to avoid recurrence. Use when debugging errors, resolving regressions, fixing bugs, or triaging issues.
sf-apex
IncludedGenerates and reviews Salesforce Apex code with 150-point scoring. TRIGGER when: user writes, reviews, or fixes Apex classes, triggers, test classes, batch/queueable/schedulable jobs, or touches .cls/.trigger files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: LWC JavaScript (use sf-lwc), Flow XML (use sf-flow), SOQL-only queries (use sf-soql), or non-Salesforce code.
swift-development
IncludedComprehensive Swift development for building, testing, and deploying iOS/macOS applications. Use when Claude needs to: (1) Build Swift packages or Xcode projects from command line, (2) Run tests with XCTest or Swift Testing framework, (3) Manage iOS simulators with simctl, (4) Handle code signing, provisioning profiles, and app distribution, (5) Format or lint Swift code with SwiftFormat/SwiftLint, (6) Work with Swift Package Manager (SPM), (7) Implement Swift 6 concurrency patterns (async/await, actors, Sendable), (8) Create SwiftUI views with MVVM architecture, (9) Set up Core Data or SwiftData persistence, or any other Swift/iOS/macOS development tasks.