speckit-aee-gate
Skill4 starsChanged 54 days agoMITView on GitHub
Apply a CI-friendly decision gate to an AEE assessment
1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- electrohire/spec-kit-evaluatoredited, first seen Oct 25, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- electrohire/spec-kit-evaluator★ 397% same
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
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 repository25 other files it gives its agents.
- speckit-aee-assessSkill
- speckit-aee-challengeSkill
- speckit-aee-draft-claimsSkill
- speckit-aee-gapsSkill
- speckit-aee-message-securitySkill
- speckit-aee-report-savingsSkill
- speckit-aee-reviewSkill
- speckit-aee-route-evidenceSkill
- speckit-aee-traceSkill
- speckit-aee-verifySkill
- speckit-analyzeSkill
- speckit-checklistSkill
- speckit-clarifySkill
- speckit-constitutionSkill
- speckit-convergeSkill
- speckit-evaluator-composeSkill
- speckit-evaluator-reportSkill
- speckit-evaluator-routeSkill
- speckit-evaluator-runSkill
- speckit-implementSkill
- speckit-planSkill
- speckit-specifySkill
- speckit-tasksSkill
- speckit-taskstoissuesSkill
- spec-kit-aeeSkill
The file
Files
Aee Gate Skill
AEE Gate
Apply the AEE exit-code contract to an existing rich assessment.
User input
$ARGUMENTSResolve assessment=<path> inside .specify/extensions/aee/assessments/ unless an explicit in-project path is supplied. Refuse symlinks and run:
python .specify/extensions/aee/scripts/python/run_aee.py gate --input "<assessment>"To gate the most recent assessment for a lifecycle phase instead of naming a file, use the pointer that assess maintains:
python .specify/extensions/aee/scripts/python/run_aee.py gate --latest "<phase>"--latest refuses (exit 2) when no assessment has been recorded for the phase, and prints the resolved assessment's age to stderr — check it before trusting the verdict, because it gates whatever the pointer names, however old. --input and --latest are mutually exclusive.
Exit semantics are: 0 for pass or warn, 1 for iterate, clarify, or gather_evidence, and 2 for block or malformed input.
To require lane 1 (machine verification) to pass on its own facts — regardless of where lane 2 (human review and acceptance) stands — add --require-lane1-pass:
python .specify/extensions/aee/scripts/python/run_aee.py gate --input "<assessment>" --require-lane1-passThe runner forwards the option to the engine's gate unchanged and preserves its exit codes exactly: 0 when lane 1 passes, 1 when lane 1 is in the iterate family (recovery needed), and 2 when the engine blocks or refuses on integrity grounds (for example, a lane-1 outcome recorded in the file that the recorded facts do not support). Use it when a step must know the machine checks passed even though people are still reviewing; it says nothing about lane 2, and it never replaces the headline gate for a step that needs both lanes done. For multi-evaluator release policy, use /speckit-evaluator-report format=gate on a composed result.
A gate verdict is a lane-1 (machine verification) decision: it says the recorded evidence passed the recorded checks — in the normal path, acceptance is exactly this, the frozen requirement tests passing and recorded as a test verdict, not a human act. It does not say any human has explained, accepted, or digested the claims — read the assessment's lane-2 state (lanes.lane_2) and its not_understood entries alongside the gate result before treating gated work as settled. A gated assessment that lacks a not_understood statement is itself incomplete and the gate refuses it (exit 2).
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.

