gap-analysis
Skill2 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Identifies what is MISSING from a deliverable — gaps in structure, stakeholder coverage, scenarios, risks, evidence, and regulatory considerations. Runs in parallel with the Analyst. Use when checking deliverable completeness or detecting blind spots.
21 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- DatasiteAI/mcp-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 3, 2026
- MarieLynneBlock/arcanum-artifextheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- Happy-Technologies-LLC/happy-platform-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- richardochristjia/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- TanStack/aitheir own version, first seen Oct 22, 2026
- adeerkhan/vitruviustheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
Other versions21 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 21
- TanStack/ai★ 3.3ksame name
- magnus919/agent-skills★ 172same name
- zrosenfield/sharepoint-ai-skills★ 96same name
- Happy-Technologies-LLC/happy-platform-skills★ 41same name
- agent-ix/quoin★ 20same name
- afonsoft/skills★ 14same name
- excatt/superclaude-plusplus★ 14same name
- adeerkhan/vitruvius★ 10same name
- DatasiteAI/mcp-skills★ 5same name
- kevinlin/skills★ 5same name
11 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository10 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- jp-client-defenderSkill
- file-preprocessingSkill
- deliverable-analysisSkill
- decision-analysisSkill
- jp-client-critiqueSkill
- persuasion-scenariosSkill
- consulting-qaSkill
- html-report-generationSkill
- quality-gateSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 20 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 22
Read the preprocessed deliverable
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 20 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Gap Analysis Skill
{WORKSPACE}= timestamped run directory provided by the orchestrator.
Purpose
Detect blind spots. The Analyst extracts what the deliverable contains; the Gap Analyzer identifies what it SHOULD contain but doesn't. These two tasks are independent and run in parallel.
When to Use
- Any deliverable needs completeness assessment
- Need to identify missing sections, unconsidered scenarios, absent stakeholders
- Preparing for a review where "why didn't you consider X?" questions are expected
Process
- Read the preprocessed deliverable
- Identify the deliverable type (test plan, design doc, proposal, report)
- Apply the 6-dimension gap analysis framework
- Score each gap by severity (CRITICAL / IMPORTANT / NICE_TO_HAVE)
- Identify missing stakeholder perspectives
- Output structured gap report
Integration with Pipeline
- Runs at: Phase 1 (parallel with Analyst)
- No dependency on Analyst — reads preprocessed input directly
- Feeds into: Phase 1.5 (Decision Advisor may reference gaps), Phase 2 (Critic incorporates gap findings), Phase 4 (QA validates gap analysis)
- Report: Gaps appear in a dedicated "Gaps" section with different visual treatment from criticism findings
Quality Checklist
- All 6 dimensions analyzed (structural, stakeholder, scenario, risk, evidence, regulatory)
- Each gap has a specific recommendation (not just "add this")
- Severity classifications are justified
- Missing perspectives identified with specific "what they would flag"
- Completeness score calculated with rationale
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.