Tailor Spec
Description
An agent-agnostic skill that turns fuzzy feature requests into concrete implementation plans through a phased, review-gated workflow. Works with any coding agent that can follow a SKILL.md / AGENTS.md convention (Claude Code, Cursor, and others).
Installation
This entry records only its repository, not the path inside it, so there is no
exact command to give. Open the source below and copy the folder into
~/.claude/skills/, or the file into ~/.claude/agents/.
README
tailor-spec
An agent-agnostic skill that turns fuzzy feature requests into concrete implementation plans. Works with any coding agent that follows a SKILL.md / AGENTS.md convention (Claude Code, Cursor, and others).
What it does
The agent picks the weight of the spec from the shape of the work, and says which it chose:
- Compact — one
compact-spec.md, one approval gate. The default, and where a borderline call lands. - Full — requirements, design + test plan, tasks. Four documents, three gates. Escalated to when the change spans separately deployed or owned components, breaks compatibility on a public contract, migrates data, decides or stores auth or PII, adds an external dependency or integration, or would outlive a revert. Every trigger carries a limit that keeps it from swallowing ordinary work — a backward-compatible addition is not a break, several files inside one deployable unit is not multiple components, and one more call against a service already in use is not a new integration.
A compact spec that outgrows itself gets split into the full set, keeping its requirement IDs; the expanded documents go back to `Draft` for review rather than inheriting the approval. The reverse runs only while the full documents are still `Draft`, so an approval already given is never thrown away.
Acceptance criteria carry stable `R` IDs, and every design decision, verification row, and task references them — so a requirement change points straight at the work it affects. Every document tracks `Status: Draft | Approved`, so a spec picked up days later resumes where it left off instead of re-asking for approvals; the document owning the task list carries `Implemented` and `Verified` on top of that.
Verification is planned before implementation, and each requirement is matched to the level that can actually close it. A passing unit test is not evidence that a requirement holds at the system boundary — unit tests close a *task*, the verificat
Related Skills
Spec Kit
💫 Toolkit to help you get started with Spec-Driven Development
Testing Webapp Testing
Test local web applications using Playwright for UI verification and debugging
Testing #29
, [#52](https://github.com/affaan-m/everything-claude-code/issues/52), [#103](https://github.com/affaan-m/ever
Testing Fix Issue
by metabase - Addresses GitHub issues by taking issue number as parameter, analyzing context, implementing sol
Testing Pypict Test Design
Design comprehensive test cases using PICT (Pairwise Independent Combinatorial Testing) for optimized test sui
Testing gstack
| 15,000+ | Garry Tan's exact Claude Code setup: 6 opinionated tools that serve as CEO, Eng Manager, Release M
Testing