/edikt:sdlc:spec-review

Re-score an existing SPEC against the rubric and validate it against its source PRD.

Use this before generating artifacts, before planning, or any time a SPEC has been edited outside /edikt:sdlc:spec. The five checks catch the failure modes that silently ship the wrong scope.

Usage

/edikt:sdlc:spec-review SPEC-005

The SPEC identifier is required. The command reads SPEC-005/spec.md and the spec sidecar (or YAML frontmatter), then resolves the linked PRD via the implements: field.

What it checks

Check	What it catches
Rubric score	Same rubric /edikt:sdlc:spec uses at authoring time. Threshold inherits from the linked PRD's rigor.
FR coverage	Every PRD FR-NNN is covered by at least one spec SR-NNN, or explicitly deferred with rationale.
AC pass-through	Every PRD AC-NNN-M appears in the SPEC unchanged. Any rewording is a violation.
Broken refs	Linked ADRs, invariants, or PRDs that point to files that don't exist.
Sidecar drift	The spec.md was edited after the last sync.

Output

SPEC REVIEW — SPEC-005

  Title:          Webhook delivery
  Implements:     PRD-005 (v2)
  Status:         accepted
  Rigor (from PRD): team

  Rubric score:   8/10 (team threshold: 8/10)
                  ✓ PASS

  FR coverage:    4/5 covered, 0 deferred, 1 uncovered
    ⚠ Uncovered FRs: FR-005

  AC pass-through: 7/8 unchanged
    ⚠ Modified ACs:
      • AC-001-1: given text changed from "..." to "..."

  ⚠ Broken references (1):
    • ADR-942 — not found in docs/architecture/decisions/

Next:
  • Revise SPEC:        /edikt:sdlc:spec PRD-005
  • Review linked PRD:  /edikt:sdlc:prd-review PRD-005
  • Check drift:        /edikt:sdlc:drift SPEC-005

If everything is clean, the report ends with ✓ All checks pass.

FR coverage is the flagship check

A SPEC that passes the rubric but has uncovered PRD FRs is silently shipping the wrong scope. Coverage is the only structural link between PRD and SPEC that this command can verify.

For each requirement in the PRD's requirements:, the SPEC must do one of:

• Include it in source_prd_coverage.covered[] — at least one SR-NNN carries implements: FR-NNN
• Include it in source_prd_coverage.deferred[] with a non-empty rationale
• Include it in source_prd_coverage.uncovered[] — explicitly acknowledged as out-of-scope

Anything not mentioned is flagged as a missing coverage entry. The default for ambiguous gaps is fail — silent omission is the failure mode this check exists to catch.

AC pass-through is strict

Every PRD AC-NNN-M must appear in the SPEC with the same id and byte-equal Given/When/Then text. SAC-NNN entries (spec-added architectural criteria) are additions, not modifications, and are ignored by this check.

If an AC needs clarification, revise the PRD and re-run the SPEC. Don't reword it in the SPEC — that breaks the chain the evaluator uses at phase-end.

v1 PRDs limit what we can check

If the SPEC's source PRD is v1 (no sidecar), coverage and AC pass-through are not verifiable — there's no structured PRD to compare against. The rubric and broken-ref checks still run, but the report flags the limitation.

To upgrade the source PRD, re-author it with /edikt:sdlc:prd PRD-NNN.

What's next

• /edikt:sdlc:spec — revise the SPEC
• /edikt:sdlc:prd-review — re-score the source PRD
• /edikt:sdlc:drift — check whether implementation matches the SPEC
• PRD v2 Deep Dive — how the FR/AC chain works end-to-end