kiro-spec-status
Skill3 starsChanged 6 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Show specification status and progress
3 other projects use a version of this, 3 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- aiproxer/aiproxeredited, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- growilabs/growiedited, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- kyuki3rain/cc-sdd-adredited, first seen Jul 27, 2026
Other versions3 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 3
- growilabs/growi★ 1.5k81% same
- aiproxer/aiproxer★ 2292% same
- kyuki3rain/cc-sdd-adr★ 081% 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 repository34 other files it gives its agents.
- cc-sdd-restack-after-mergeSkill
- cc-sdd-review-slice-stackSkill
- ci-stable-log-testingSkill
- create-issueSkill
- docker-deployment-guideSkill
- hibernate-pcSkill
- kiro-debugSkill
- kiro-discoverySkill
- kiro-implSkill
- kiro-reviewSkill
- kiro-spec-batchSkill
- kiro-spec-designSkill
- kiro-spec-initSkill
- kiro-spec-quickSkill
- kiro-spec-requirementsSkill
- kiro-spec-tasksSkill
- kiro-steering-customSkill
- kiro-steeringSkill
- kiro-validate-designSkill
- kiro-validate-gapSkill
- kiro-validate-implSkill
- kiro-verify-completionSkill
- notion-pdfSkill
- playwright-scraperSkill
- pptx-slides-creatorSkill
- pr-creatorSkill
- pytest-marksSkill
- python-readable-codeSkill
- resolve-pr-review-threadsSkill
- sec-diff-reviewSkill
- sec-full-scanSkill
- sec-runtime-scanSkill
- skill-creatorSkill
- storage-stateSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
11 rules. 4 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 7 are very specific to this project.
4
Common
Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.
0
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
7
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 21
Read docs/specs/$1/spec.json for metadata and phase status
- Very specific: line 22
Read docs/specs/$1/brief.md if it exists
- Very specific: line 23
Read existing files: requirements.md, design.md, tasks.md (if they exist)
- Very specific: line 24
Check docs/specs/$1/ directory for available files
- Very specific: line 25
Read docs/steering/roadmap.md if it exists and this spec appears in it
- Common: line 31
Design: Check for architecture, components, diagrams, and whether boundary sections are present
- Very specific: line 33
Approvals: Check approval status in spec.json
- Common: line 40
Call out when the current spec shape looks too broad and may want roadmap/design splitting instead of more local repair
- Very specific: line 44
Create report in the language specified in spec.json covering:
- Common: line 47
Task Breakdown: If tasks exist, show completed/remaining counts
- Common: line 70
Run with no argument or use wildcard
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 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
Specification Status
<background_information>
- Success Criteria:
- Show current phase and completion status
- Identify next actions and blockers
- Provide clear visibility into progress
- Surface boundary readiness, upstream/downstream context, and likely revalidation needs when available </background_information>
<instructions>
## Execution StepsStep 1: Load Spec Context
- Read
docs/specs/$1/spec.jsonfor metadata and phase status - Read
docs/specs/$1/brief.mdif it exists - Read existing files:
requirements.md,design.md,tasks.md(if they exist) - Check
docs/specs/$1/directory for available files - Read
docs/steering/roadmap.mdif it exists and this spec appears in it
Step 2: Analyze Status
Parse each phase:
- Requirements: Count requirements and acceptance criteria
- Design: Check for architecture, components, diagrams, and whether boundary sections are present
- Tasks: Count completed vs total tasks (parse
- [x]vs- [ ]) - Approvals: Check approval status in spec.json
- Boundary context:
- From brief.md: note
Boundary Candidates,Upstream / Downstream, andExisting Spec Touchpointsif present - From design.md: note
Boundary Commitments,Out of Boundary,Allowed Dependencies, andRevalidation Triggersif present - From roadmap.md: note upstream dependencies and whether this spec is adjacent to
Existing Spec Updates
- From brief.md: note
- Revalidation watchlist:
- Identify downstream specs, neighboring existing-spec updates, or rollout-sensitive design notes that may need revalidation if this spec changes
- Call out when the current spec shape looks too broad and may want roadmap/design splitting instead of more local repair
Step 3: Generate Report
Create report in the language specified in spec.json covering:
- Current Phase & Progress: Where the spec is in the workflow
- Completion Status: Percentage complete for each phase
- Task Breakdown: If tasks exist, show completed/remaining counts
- Boundary Context: Upstream/downstream, out-of-boundary, and allowed dependency notes when available
- Revalidation Watchlist: Downstream or adjacent work likely affected by changes to this spec
- Next Actions: What needs to be done next
- Blockers: Any issues preventing progress
</instructions>Safety & Fallback
Error Scenarios
Spec Not Found:
- Message: "No spec found for
$1. Check available specs indocs/specs/" - Action: List available spec directories
Incomplete Spec:
- Warning: Identify which files are missing
- Suggested Action: Point to next phase command
List All Specs
To see all available specs:
- Run with no argument or use wildcard
- Shows all specs in
docs/specs/with their status
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.

