mcpField
A
analyze-consistency

analyze-consistency

github.com/nextstage-brasilTesting & quality040 installsUpdated 5d ago
Repository

About analyze-consistency

A requirements consistency-checking skill for teams validating plans before implementation. It checks feature structure, test coverage, data models, APIs, and alignment, then reports blockers and warnings without editing requirements.

Key features

  1. 01Indexes objectives, features, NFRs, and stack
  2. 02Checks feature integrity and precedence
  3. 03Reviews test coverage and data-model alignment
  4. 04Writes a consistency report
  5. 05Defines whether planning can proceed

Use cases

  1. 01Review requirements after scope confirmation
  2. 02Check consistency after manual requirements edits
  3. 03Identify blockers before generating implementation tasks

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/nextstage-brasil/skills --skill analyze-consistency

After installing, type/analyze-consistencyin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Bundled filesevals/evals.json

Details

From the project README

Analyze Consistency

Pre-execution validation: plan vs plan before coding.

Harness discovery

See ../nextstage-harness/references/harness-discovery.md. Load rules from {harness_root}/rules/*.md. Read architecture-rules.md first. Legacy: .cursor/rules/*.mdc only if {harness_root} is absent.

When to use

  • After Gate 2 (scope_confirmed)
  • User asks "analyze requirements" or "check consistency"
  • After manual requirements.md edits

Prerequisites

  • {product_root}/docs/versions/{version_san}/requirements.md exists
  • Create version directory if missing before writing report

Workflow

Step 1 — Index requirements

Read requirements.md and index:

  • Main objective
  • Features (title, precedence, acceptance criteria)
  • NFRs
  • Declared stack
Step 2 — Run checks

Classify each as ✅ OK | ⚠️ Warning | ❌ Blocker:

Feature integrity

CheckFailure level
Every feature has title, description, acceptance criteria❌ Blocker
At least 2 acceptance criteria per feature⚠️ Warning
No circular precedence❌ Blocker
At least one root feature (no precedence)❌ Blocker
Frontend features mention test ids when E2E expected⚠️ Warning

Test coverage

CheckFailure level
Backend features include unit test criteria⚠️ Warning
UI features include E2E criteria⚠️ Warning
Infra before domain on greenfield⚠️ Warning

Data model

CheckFailure level
Clear "Data model and APIs" section❌ Blocker
All entities in features listed in data model❌ Blocker
FK creation order respected❌ Blocker
API endpoints for frontend consumption declared❌ Blocker

Alignment

CheckFailure level
Features support stated objective⚠️ Warning
Out-of-scope features present⚠️ Warning

Apply stack-specific checks from harness rules when they exist (Laravel/React checks are optional).

Step 3 — Report

Save to {product_root}/docs/versions/{version_san}/consistency-report.md:

# Consistency Report — {version_san}

**Date:** {date}
**Analyzed:** `{path}`

## Overall result

✅ 100% approved | ⚠️ Approved with reservations | ❌ Requires correction

## Blockers (❌)

...

## Warnings (⚠️)

...

## Passed (✅)

Count and summary

## Recommendations

Optional improvements
Step 4 — Proceed decision
  • ❌ Blockers: Stop — ask user to fix requirements, then re-run
  • ⚠️ Only warnings: Ask fix now or proceed; user decides
  • 100% ✅: Inform auto-proceed to task generation; execution_confirmed implicit (skip Gate 3)

Critical rules

  • Do not edit requirements.md — report issues only
  • Blockers prevent task generation without fix or explicit waiver
  • If requirements missing → redirect to Gate 1 / requirements-generator

Integration

Gate 2 → analyze-consistency → [100%] → task-generator
                            → [blockers] → fix requirements

Post-implementation: code-reviewer validates requirements × code — complementary, not a substitute.

Comments

Markdown supported