Codex Libretto Specification Review for Missing Migration Rules
Compare a proposed specification with its important files and flag under-specified design choices, logical gaps and adherence issues.
中文Install in Codex
Open the project and spec in Codex. Supply its important files and authorized subagents if the review uses parallel reads. The example concerns local view settings.
- Review `.agents/skills/spec-review/SKILL.md` and its requirements at the pinned GitHub commit.
- Create `.agents/skills/spec-review/` in your project and save the reviewed file as `.agents/skills/spec-review/SKILL.md`.
- Start Codex from that project's root, then type `$spec-review` and select the matching skill.
Example task
Review this illustrative settings migration requirement.
{"specSection":"migration","planned":"rename viewMode to density","existingRecords":true,"oldValueFallback":"unspecified","evidence":"src/settings.ts:21"}What to check
List `oldValueFallback=unspecified` as a specification gap and cite `src/settings.ts:21`. Clarify how existing settings convert before implementing.
Original SKILL.md on GitHub · Updated
Frequently asked question
Should a missing exact function signature become a finding?
Focus on decisions that could send implementation in the wrong direction. Routine implementation and type-check details generally need no separate finding.