agentleFS
agent-ixagent-ix/spec-skills/spec-failure-domain-analysis/SKILL.md

spec-failure-domain-analysis

Skill1 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub

Identify unstated failure modes, identity confusion, purity gaps, and topological edge cases in ISO-style specifications.

1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈3

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Run this skill during spec review to catch common omissions before implementation.

    line 8
  2. Very specific:

    After drafting FR/NFR/StR requirements

    line 11
  3. Very specific:

    Before spec-to-plan (part of its readiness gate)

    line 12
  4. Distinctive:

    Document if read-only is required for simulation/reasoning

    line 33
  5. Distinctive:

    Document any missing constraints as proposed additions:

    line 41

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Spec Failure Domain Analysis

Run this skill during spec review to catch common omissions before implementation.

When to Use

  • After drafting FR/NFR/StR requirements
  • Before spec-to-plan (part of its readiness gate)
  • During peer review of specifications

Checklist

1. Extension Points (Trust Boundaries)

For each callback, hook, observer, or plugin interface:

  • Is failure behavior defined? Options:
    • Strict: Failure aborts operation (data integrity)
    • Resilient: Failure is logged/suppressed (availability)
    • Configurable: User chooses policy

2. Entity Identity

For each core domain entity (State, Event, User, etc.):

  • Is the uniqueness key explicit?
    • Bad: "A set of states"
    • Good: "States unique by name property"

3. Evaluation Purity

For each user-supplied logic (guards, filters, validators):

  • Are side-effects constrained?
    • Document if read-only is required for simulation/reasoning

4. Topological Robustness

For each graph/tree algorithm (search, path-finding):

  • Is termination guaranteed on cycles?
  • Are worst-case structures considered? (deep nesting, disconnected nodes)

Output

Document any missing constraints as proposed additions:

  • NFR: Non-functional (resilience, performance)
  • StR: Structural (integrity, purity)
  • FR: Functional (if behavior is undefined)

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.