| 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
- Read PRD: Load from
{projectFolder}/prd.md - Call MCP:
vibe_check({ prdContent, projectContext? }) - Parse response:
coherent(boolean),issues(array),recommendation("proceed" | "revise") - 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.