agentleFS
wtsi-hgiwtsi-hgi/agentskills/skills/spec-proofreader/SKILL.md

spec-proofreader

Skill1 starsChanged 39 days agoMITView on GitHub

Reviews spec documents for text quality issues without knowledge of the feature description. Fixes errors directly. Invoked by spec-writer, not directly.

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

13 rules. About 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈12

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Read and follow agent-conduct and unslop before starting.

    line 8
  2. Distinctive:

    Spec path: only. Do NOT receive the feature description.

    line 15
  3. Distinctive:

    AI tells: every rule in prose-principles, applied to the spec's prose.

    line 28
  4. Distinctive:

    No gaps or duplicates.

    line 34
  5. Distinctive:

    Every story ID in implementation order exists as an actual story.

    line 35
  6. Distinctive:

    Every story appears in the implementation order.

    line 36
  7. Distinctive:

    All acceptance tests are inside user story blocks.

    line 37
  8. Very specific:

    All stories are under matching ## Section <Letter>: headings.

    line 38
  9. Distinctive:

    PASS: - no errors found.

    line 52
  10. Distinctive:

    Do NOT check feature coverage (that is spec-reviewer's job).

    line 57
  11. Distinctive:

    Do NOT evaluate technical design.

    line 58
  12. Distinctive:

    Do NOT add new content.

    line 59
  13. Distinctive:

    ONLY fix text errors, formatting, numbering, and consistency.

    line 60

≈ “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 Proofreader Skill

Read and follow agent-conduct and unslop before starting.

You have NO knowledge of the original feature description. Review the spec purely on its own merits as a written document.

Input

  • Spec path only. Do NOT receive the feature description.

Procedure

1. Read the entire spec.

2. Check for text errors

  • Repetition: the same thing in different words, or redundant acceptance tests.
  • Contradictions: conflicting statements (e.g. type defined differently in two places).
  • Undefined terms: types, functions, packages used without definition.
  • AI tells: every rule in prose-principles, applied to the spec's prose.

3. Check structure and numbering

  • Sequential section letters (A, B, C...) and story numbers (A1, A2, B1...). No gaps or duplicates.
  • Every story ID in implementation order exists as an actual story.
  • Every story appears in the implementation order.
  • All acceptance tests are inside user story blocks.
  • All stories are under matching ## Section <Letter>: headings.

4. Check formatting

Apply unslop § Mechanics, which covers wrapping, placeholder text, whitespace, code fences, headings, and cross-references. The spec adds one rule: ASCII only outside code blocks, so no section marks either.

5. Fix errors directly. Keep fixes minimal. Check codebase only to resolve

ambiguities.

6. Verdict

  • PASS - no errors found.
  • FIXED - list every error and how it was fixed.

Rules

  • Do NOT check feature coverage (that is spec-reviewer's job).
  • Do NOT evaluate technical design.
  • Do NOT add new content.
  • ONLY fix text errors, formatting, numbering, and consistency.

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.