Claude Code Plugins

Community-maintained marketplace

Feedback

Validate PRD quality and coherence before innovation phase using vibe-check MCP tool. Checks for requirement clarity, user story completeness, and identifies gaps. Returns coherent flag and issues list.

Install Skill

1Download skill
2Enable skills in Claude

Open claude.ai/settings/capabilities and find the "Skills" section

3Upload to Claude

Click "Upload skill" and select the downloaded ZIP file

Note: Please verify skill by going through its instructions before using it.

SKILL.md

name vibe-check
description Validate PRD quality and coherence before innovation phase using vibe-check MCP tool. Checks for requirement clarity, user story completeness, and identifies gaps. Returns coherent flag and issues list.

Vibe Check - PRD Quality Gate

ROOT AGENT ONLY - Uses vibe-check MCP tool, runs only from root agent.

Purpose: Validate PRD coherence before innovation Trigger: After requirements-phase, before innovate-phase Input: PRD content (from requirements-phase) Output: Validation result (coherent, issues, recommendation)


Overview

Quality gate using vibe-check MCP tool. Validates: (1) Internal consistency, (2) Clear/specific requirements, (3) User stories with AC, (4) No critical gaps. Prevents wasted innovation effort with incoherent PRD.

When: /architect only (skipped for /build and /audit with clearer requirements)


Workflow

  1. Read PRD: Load from {projectFolder}/prd.md
  2. Call MCP: vibe_check({ prdContent, projectContext? })
  3. Parse response: coherent (boolean), issues (array), recommendation ("proceed" | "revise")
  4. Decision gate:
    • If coherent: Continue to innovate-phase (no user interaction)
    • If not coherent:
      • Report issues
      • Ask: Auto-revise or manual fixes?
      • Auto: Spawn BA to fix → requirements-phase → re-check (max 2 iterations)
      • Manual: Accept feedback → requirements-phase → re-check

Validation Criteria

Dimension Checks
Coherence PRD makes sense as a whole
Clarity Requirements specific and measurable
Completeness All sections present
Stories Acceptance criteria present
Gaps Nothing missing or unclear
Conflicts No contradictions

Output Format

{
  "status": "passed" | "failed",
  "coherent": true | false,
  "issues": [
    "User story US-003 missing acceptance criteria",
    "Requirement R-005 is vague - 'fast performance' needs quantification",
    "Gap: No error handling strategy defined"
  ],
  "recommendation": "proceed" | "revise",
  "iterations": 1
}

Examples

Failed:

Issues: US-003 missing AC, R-005 vague ("fast" needs metrics),
        No error handling, Conflict: R-002 real-time vs R-007 batch
Action: AUTO (BA fixes) or MANUAL (user guidance)?

Passed:

✓ Coherent ✓ Clear ✓ Complete ✓ No gaps → Proceeding to innovation

Revision Actions

Issue BA Fix
Missing AC Add to affected stories
Vague requirements Quantify with metrics
Conflicts Resolve (ask user if needed)
Missing sections Add based on context
Error handling gap Add strategy

Integration

Called by: /architect (Phase 3) | Calls: vibe-check MCP, business-analyst, AskUserQuestion Flow: requirements-phase → vibe-check → innovate-phase (success) OR requirements-phase (failure, max 2 loops)

Notes: Fast single MCP call. Validates coherence/clarity, not technical feasibility (architect's job). Escalate to user after 2 failed iterations.