Verify Openspec Docs

作者 fission-ai9111a7654d78无许可证71K 个星标收录于 2026年10月8日更新于 2026年10月8日仓库今天更新

Fact-checks OpenSpec user documentation with a fresh-context subagent that re-runs commands and checks claims against source. Manually triggered; not part of the drafting loop. Use when the user asks to verify, fact-check, or accuracy-check a docs page, section, or set of changed claims.

仅含说明Research & Analysis AI & Agents

AI 生成的概览

通过启动全新上下文的子代理重新运行命令并核对来源，对已完成的 OpenSpec 文档进行事实核查。

功能: 该技能对照实际代码仓库核查已完成的 OpenSpec 用户文档。它先确定目标页面、章节或变更声明清单，然后为每个单元启动一个通用子代理，重新运行终端命令、验证示例、检查结构与职责匹配度，并标记缺乏依据或夸大其词的文字。最终产出一份按严重程度排序的发现报告，包含引用原文、单行修复建议，以及已验证内容及其验证方式的说明。
适用场景: 当用户明确要求对某个文档页面、章节或一组变更声明进行验证、事实核查或准确性检查时使用。该技能为手动触发，不属于撰写流程，因此除非用户要求执行验证，否则不应在撰写过程中调用。
运行要求: 仅包含指令，技能不附带脚本。需要访问 OpenSpec 代码仓库，包括文档树 README、write-openspec-docs 写作规则和源文件，并需要能够启动子代理、运行只读终端命令以及 openspec validate。

Verify OpenSpec docs

Check finished docs prose against reality. The point of a fresh context is that the reviewer hasn't watched the prose get written, so it can't be talked into the author's assumptions.

This skill runs only when the user asks for it. Drafting is owned by write-openspec-docs; don't invoke this from inside a drafting session unless the user requests a verification pass.

Scope the run

Confirm the target: a page, one ## section, or a list of changed claims. If invoked without a target, ask.
Read the README at the root of the docs tree the target lives in; its invariants and page map are part of what gets checked.
One subagent per unit (one ## section, or the stated claim list). A full page is several subagents, run in parallel.

Spawn the reviewer

General-purpose subagent. Subagents don't inherit skills, so the prompt hands the reviewer everything by path. Fill every placeholder, make every path absolute, and send:

You are reviewing one unit of OpenSpec's user documentation before it reaches the docs owner. Be the two hardest readers it will meet: a skeptical developer reading it cold, and a fact-checker with the repo open.
Repo root: <ABSOLUTE REPO ROOT>. Use absolute paths with every tool.
Read first:1. <DOCS TREE ROOT>/README.md: the page map and standing invariants.2. <ABSOLUTE REPO ROOT>/.agents/skills/write-openspec-docs/writing.md: the house writing rules.3. <PAGE PATH>: review only <the section "<HEADING>" | these changed claims: <LIST>>; read the rest of the page for context.
Then check, in this order:
1. Facts. Every command, flag, path, config key, output block, default, and behavior claim. Re-run the terminal commands shown: read-only commands anywhere, anything that mutates state in a scratch directory or not at all. Commands for the AI chat surface (like /opsx:propose) can't run in a shell; verify their names and behavior against the skill sources this repo ships. Check names against src/ and the CLI's own --help. An output block must match what the command actually prints.2. Examples. Any example spec or change must pass `openspec validate`. Run it when the example exists on disk.3. Structure. Flag anything that re-explains a topic whose canonical home is another page, or breaks a rule the docs tree's README states.4. Job fit. Does the unit serve the page's stated job (the one-line statement under the title, if present)? Does the arriving reader get what they came for quickly?5. Trust and slop. Flag: hype or comfort adjectives (easy, simple, powerful, seamless), claims with no shown evidence, vague generalization where a specific fact belongs, binary contrasts ("not X, it's Y"), colon reveals, importance puffery, summary endings, em dashes, bullet lists that should be prose, and three parallel punchy sentences in a row.
Report findings only, most severe first. For each: quote the line, say what is wrong, and give the fix in one line. For every fact you verified, say how (the command you ran, or the file and line you checked). List any claim you could not verify and why. Do not rewrite the unit. If the unit is clean, say so and list exactly what you verified.

You are reviewing one unit of OpenSpec's user documentation before it reaches the docs owner. Be the two hardest readers it will meet: a skeptical developer reading it cold, and a fact-checker with the repo open.
Repo root: <ABSOLUTE REPO ROOT>. Use absolute paths with every tool.
Read first:1. <DOCS TREE ROOT>/README.md: the page map and standing invariants.2. <ABSOLUTE REPO ROOT>/.agents/skills/write-openspec-docs/writing.md: the house writing rules.3. <PAGE PATH>: review only <the section "<HEADING>" | these changed claims: <LIST>>; read the rest of the page for context.
Then check, in this order:
1. Facts. Every command, flag, path, config key, output block, default, and behavior claim. Re-run the terminal commands shown: read-only commands anywhere, anything that mutates state in a scratch directory or not at all. Commands for the AI chat surface (like /opsx:propose) can't run in a shell; verify their names and behavior against the skill sources this repo ships. Check names against src/ and the CLI's own --help. An output block must match what the command actually prints.2. Examples. Any example spec or change must pass `openspec validate`. Run it when the example exists on disk.3. Structure. Flag anything that re-explains a topic whose canonical home is another page, or breaks a rule the docs tree's README states.4. Job fit. Does the unit serve the page's stated job (the one-line statement under the title, if present)? Does the arriving reader get what they came for quickly?5. Trust and slop. Flag: hype or comfort adjectives (easy, simple, powerful, seamless), claims with no shown evidence, vague generalization where a specific fact belongs, binary contrasts ("not X, it's Y"), colon reveals, importance puffery, summary endings, em dashes, bullet lists that should be prose, and three parallel punchy sentences in a row.
Report findings only, most severe first. For each: quote the line, say what is wrong, and give the fix in one line. For every fact you verified, say how (the command you ran, or the file and line you checked). List any claim you could not verify and why. Do not rewrite the unit. If the unit is clean, say so and list exactly what you verified.

Handle the report

Default is report, not rewrite: show the user the findings ranked most severe first, each with the quoted line and one-line fix, plus what was verified and how, and any claim the reviewer couldn't verify.
Apply fixes only when the user asked for a verify-and-fix run or approves the findings. A verifier can also be wrong: rejections go in the report with your reason, so the user can overrule you.
If an applied fix changed a factual claim, verify again, scoped to the changed claims. Typo and wording fixes don't need a second pass.
Two passes without converging means stop and take it to the user. Don't polish in a loop.

来源与署名

来源：fission-ai/openspec位于.agents/skills/verify-openspec-docs提交9111a76

许可证：无许可证

内容归原作者所有。SourceWeft 从公开仓库中收录这些内容。

举报或申请下架

Verify Openspec Docs

Verify OpenSpec docs

Scope the run

Spawn the reviewer

Handle the report

来源与署名

更多来自 fission-ai/openspec 的技能

Write Openspec Docs

Release Openspec

Draft Openspec Docs

更多Research & Analysis技能

Equity Research

Sector Overview

Idea Generation

Competitive Analysis

Notion Research Documentation

Notion Meeting Intelligence