Spectra Analyze

Claude fork context

This generated Claude Code skill runs with context: fork. The rules in this section take precedence over the shared analyze body below.

When no change name is provided, run spectra list --json. Auto-select only when there is exactly one active change. If there are zero active changes or more than one active change, return the candidate list or empty-state message and ask the main thread to rerun /spectra-analyze <change-name>. Do NOT ask an interactive selection question inside the fork.

Analyze artifact consistency for a change. Can be invoked directly or triggered automatically when all artifacts are complete.

Input: Optionally specify a change name (e.g., /spectra-analyze add-auth). If omitted, infer from conversation context or auto-select if only one active change exists.

Prerequisites: This skill requires the spectra CLI. If any spectra command fails with "command not found" or similar, report the error and STOP.

Steps

1. Determine change name

   If not provided, infer from context or run spectra list --json to auto-select.

2. Run programmatic analysis

   spectra analyze <change-name> --json
   

   This returns structured JSON with:

   • dimensions: Array of { dimension, status, finding_count } for Coverage, Consistency, Ambiguity, Gaps
   • findings: Array of { id, dimension, severity, location, summary, recommendation }
   • artifacts_analyzed / artifacts_missing: Which artifacts were available

3. Present results

   Format the JSON output as a readable summary:

   ## Artifact Analysis: <change-name>
   
   | Dimension     | Status                   |
   |---------------|--------------------------|
   | Coverage      | <status>                 |
   | Consistency   | <status>                 |
   | Ambiguity     | <status>                 |
   | Gaps          | <status>                 |
   

   Group findings by severity (Critical > Warning > Suggestion) with locations and recommendations.

4. Supplement with AI semantic analysis (optional)

   The programmatic analyzer catches structural issues. For deeper semantic analysis, also read the artifacts and check for:

   • Design decisions that contradict spec requirements
   • Tasks referencing work outside proposal scope
   • Risks in design without corresponding spec coverage
   • Logical inconsistencies between artifacts

   Add any additional findings to the report.

5. Recommend next steps

   • If CRITICAL findings: "Found N issue(s) worth addressing. Want to fix these before implementing?"
   • If only warnings/suggestions: Note them briefly, then recommend proceeding with /spectra-apply
   • If clean: "Artifacts look consistent" and suggest /spectra-apply

Passive Trigger

When spectra status --change "<name>" --json shows isComplete: true, run this analysis automatically before recommending /spectra-apply.

Guardrails

• Read-only: NEVER modify files
• Do NOT prompt for change selection if it can be inferred
• Keep output concise - this runs inline, not as a separate workflow
• If AskUserQuestion tool is not available, ask the same questions as plain text and wait for the user's response