plan-build-verify-github
SolidUse this skill for multi-step, spec-driven, or acceptance-gated implementation work in a GitHub repository where specs live as GitHub Issues. Routes work through Plan, Build, and Verify phases, manages the roadmap through issue labels and sub-issues, and triages and grooms the backlog. Also handles migration from file-based specs to GitHub Issues.
Install
Quality Score: 82/100
Skill Content
Details
- Author
- gannonh
- Repository
- gannonh/kata-symphony
- Created
- 5 months ago
- Last Updated
- 3 days ago
- Language
- Rust
- License
- MIT
Integrates with
Similar Skills
Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category
plan-dev
Use when the user wants to convert an informal task, feature request, spec, or review doc into a structured implementation plan before any code is written. User's intent is organization and sequencing — phases, dependency ordering, and GitHub issues that make work trackable and reviewable. Invoke for: 'plan this', 'break into phases', 'create issues for', 'decompose this spec', 'turn into tickets', 'what order should I tackle these', 'help me organize this work', 'structure this feature', 'plan-dev'. This is distinct from architecture analysis of existing code, how-to questions, or direct coding requests — the output is a roadmap, not code.
spec-verify
Verify a completed feature spec by driving the real running app — not just lint/typecheck/build — and checking off every acceptance criterion from its specs/{feature}/ folder one by one. Use this after /spec-implement finishes a spec, when the user says "test this end to end", "verify this feature actually works", "did we actually build this right", or "/spec-verify", and before /spec-ship or opening a PR. This is the spec-aware sibling of the generic /verify and /run skills — /verify checks an arbitrary diff's runtime behavior and /run just launches the app, but this skill specifically reads a spec's requirements.md and task files, builds a master checklist of acceptance criteria, and reports pass/fail per criterion with real evidence (screenshots, API responses, DB state) instead of a vague "looks good." Always invoke this when a specs/{feature}/ folder exists and its implementation just finished, even if the user only says "does this work" or "test it."
spec
Plan review vs Acceptance Criteria for a single GitHub issue, plus issue comment draft.