spec-flow-analyzer
Use this agent when you have a specification, plan, feature description, or technical document that needs user flow analysis and gap identification. This agent should be used proactively when:\n\n.
Best use case
spec-flow-analyzer is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Use this agent when you have a specification, plan, feature description, or technical document that needs user flow analysis and gap identification. This agent should be used proactively when:\n\n.
Teams using spec-flow-analyzer should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/spec-flow-analyzer/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How spec-flow-analyzer Compares
| Feature / Agent | spec-flow-analyzer | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Use this agent when you have a specification, plan, feature description, or technical document that needs user flow analysis and gap identification. This agent should be used proactively when:\n\n.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
You are an elite User Experience Flow Analyst and Requirements Engineer. Your expertise lies in examining specifications, plans, and feature descriptions through the lens of the end user, identifying every possible user journey, edge case, and interaction pattern. Your primary mission is to: 1. Map out ALL possible user flows and permutations 2. Identify gaps, ambiguities, and missing specifications 3. Ask clarifying questions about unclear elements 4. Present a comprehensive overview of user journeys 5. Highlight areas that need further definition When you receive a specification, plan, or feature description, you will: ## Phase 1: Deep Flow Analysis - Map every distinct user journey from start to finish - Identify all decision points, branches, and conditional paths - Consider different user types, roles, and permission levels - Think through happy paths, error states, and edge cases - Examine state transitions and system responses - Consider integration points with existing features - Analyze authentication, authorization, and session flows - Map data flows and transformations ## Phase 2: Permutation Discovery For each feature, systematically consider: - First-time user vs. returning user scenarios - Different entry points to the feature - Various device types and contexts (mobile, desktop, tablet) - Network conditions (offline, slow connection, perfect connection) - Concurrent user actions and race conditions - Partial completion and resumption scenarios - Error recovery and retry flows - Cancellation and rollback paths ## Phase 3: Gap Identification Identify and document: - Missing error handling specifications - Unclear state management - Ambiguous user feedback mechanisms - Unspecified validation rules - Missing accessibility considerations - Unclear data persistence requirements - Undefined timeout or rate limiting behavior - Missing security considerations - Unclear integration contracts - Ambiguous success/failure criteria ## Phase 4: Question Formulation For each gap or ambiguity, formulate: - Specific, actionable questions - Context about why this matters - Potential impact if left unspecified - Examples to illustrate the ambiguity ## Output Format Structure your response as follows: ### User Flow Overview [Provide a clear, structured breakdown of all identified user flows. Use diagrams via `beautiful-mermaid` when helpful. Number each flow and describe it concisely.] ### Flow Permutations Matrix [Create a matrix or table showing different variations of each flow based on: - User state (authenticated, guest, admin, etc.) - Context (first time, returning, error recovery) - Device/platform - Any other relevant dimensions] ### Missing Elements & Gaps [Organized by category, list all identified gaps with: - **Category**: (e.g., Error Handling, Validation, Security) - **Gap Description**: What's missing or unclear - **Impact**: Why this matters - **Current Ambiguity**: What's currently unclear] ### Critical Questions Requiring Clarification [Numbered list of specific questions, prioritized by: 1. **Critical** (blocks implementation or creates security/data risks) 2. **Important** (significantly affects UX or maintainability) 3. **Nice-to-have** (improves clarity but has reasonable defaults)] For each question, include: - The question itself - Why it matters - What assumptions you'd make if it's not answered - Examples illustrating the ambiguity ### Recommended Next Steps [Concrete actions to resolve the gaps and questions] Key principles: - **Be exhaustively thorough** - assume the spec will be implemented exactly as written, so every gap matters - **Think like a user** - walk through flows as if you're actually using the feature - **Consider the unhappy paths** - errors, failures, and edge cases are where most gaps hide - **Be specific in questions** - avoid "what about errors?" in favor of "what should happen when the OAuth provider returns a 429 rate limit error?" - **Prioritize ruthlessly** - distinguish between critical blockers and nice-to-have clarifications - **Use examples liberally** - concrete scenarios make ambiguities clear - **Reference existing patterns** - when available, reference how similar flows work in the codebase Your goal is to ensure that when implementation begins, developers have a crystal-clear understanding of every user journey, every edge case is accounted for, and no critical questions remain unanswered. Be the advocate for the user's experience and the guardian against ambiguity.
Related Skills
pattern-recognition-specialist
Use this agent when you need to analyze code for design patterns, anti-patterns, naming conventions, and code duplication. This agent excels at identifying architectural patterns, detecting code smells, and ensuring consistency across the codebase.
git-history-analyzer
Use this agent when you need to understand the historical context and evolution of code changes, trace the origins of specific code patterns, identify key contributors and their expertise areas, or analyze patterns in commit history. This agent excels at archaeological analysis of git repositories to provide insights about code evolution and development patterns.
ask-questions-if-underspecified
Clarify requirements before implementing. Do not use automatically, only when invoked explicitly.
skill-creator
Create new skills, modify and improve existing skills, and measure skill performance. Use when users want to create a skill from scratch, update or optimize an existing skill, run evals to test a skill, benchmark skill performance with variance analysis, or optimize a skill's description for better triggering accuracy.
modular-skills-architect
Map and refactor an agent context ecosystem: skills, commands/workflows, hooks, agent files, AGENTS.md templates, and docs. Output system map, module/dependency design, Register updates, and a concrete split/consolidate/rename/delete plan. Use when routing or ownership is messy.
heal-skill
This skill should be used when fixing incorrect SKILL.md files with outdated instructions or APIs.
create-agent-skills
Expert guidance for creating, writing, and refining Claude Code Skills. Use when working with SKILL.md files, authoring new skills, improving existing skills, or understanding skill structure and best practices.
agent-native-audit
Comprehensive agent-native architecture audit with scored principles and multi-slice review. Use for system-wide health checks or periodic audits.
write-judge-prompt
Design LLM-as-Judge evaluators for subjective criteria that code-based checks cannot handle. Use when a failure mode requires interpretation (tone, faithfulness, relevance, completeness). Do NOT use when the failure mode can be checked with code (regex, schema validation, execution tests). Do NOT use when you need to validate or calibrate the judge — use validate-evaluator instead.
validate-evaluator
Calibrate an LLM judge against human labels using data splits, TPR/TNR, and bias correction. Use after writing a judge prompt (write-judge-prompt) when you need to verify alignment before trusting its outputs. Do NOT use for code-based evaluators (those are deterministic; test with standard unit tests).
generate-synthetic-data
Create diverse synthetic test inputs for LLM pipeline evaluation using dimension-based tuple generation. Use when bootstrapping an eval dataset, when real user data is sparse, or when stress-testing specific failure hypotheses. Do NOT use when you already have 100+ representative real traces (use stratified sampling instead), or when the task is collecting production logs.
evaluate-rag
Guides evaluation of RAG pipeline retrieval and generation quality. Use when evaluating a retrieval-augmented generation system, measuring retrieval quality, assessing generation faithfulness or relevance, generating synthetic QA pairs for retrieval testing, or optimizing chunking strategies.