validate-skill-coverage

Validate Skill Coverage

Overview

Meta-skill that audits the skills index against product development lifecycle phases. Identifies which phases are well-covered, which have gaps, and how skills are distributed across the lifecycle. Outputs a coverage report directly in the conversation.

Workflow

1. Read the skills index — Read skills/skills-index.yaml to get the full list of registered skills with their categories, tiers, and descriptions.

2. Read individual skill files — For each skill in the index, read its SKILL.md to understand what lifecycle phase(s) it covers. Note the skill's tier (Tier 1 = daily driver, Tier 2 = important, Tier 3 = reference/stack-specific).

1. Define lifecycle phases — Map skills against these standard product development phases:

   • Discovery: User research, JTBD analysis, feedback synthesis
   • Definition: PRD writing, user stories, requirements
   • Design: API design, data modeling, experiment design
   • Planning: Estimation, backlog scoring, sprint planning
   • Implementation: Coding patterns, code review, commit messages
   • Testing: Test plans, test coverage validation, testing patterns
   • Release: Release checklists, release notes, rollback plans
   • Operations: Incident reports, debugging, security audits
   • Evaluation: Metrics analysis, decision logging, research synthesis
   • Governance: ADRs, RFCs, tech debt management

2. Generate the coverage matrix — For each phase, list: (a) skills that cover it, (b) the tier of each skill, (c) whether the coverage is complete or partial.

3. Identify gaps — Flag phases with no skills or only Tier 3 (reference) coverage. Prioritize gaps by impact: phases that every team needs (implementation, testing) are higher priority than niche phases.

4. Assess distribution — Check for imbalances: too many skills in one phase (redundancy), missing Tier 1 skills for critical phases, or Tier 3 skills without corresponding Tier 1/2 foundations.

5. Report in conversation — Present the coverage matrix, gap analysis, and recommendations directly in the conversation. Do not write a file.

Output

• Format: Coverage report delivered in the conversation (no file written)
• Key sections: Coverage Matrix (phase x skill table), Gap Analysis (uncovered phases ranked by priority), Distribution Assessment (tier balance), Recommendations (suggested new skills to fill gaps)

Anti-patterns

• Treating all gaps equally — A missing "sprint planning" skill is lower priority than a missing "security audit" skill. Prioritize gaps by risk and frequency of need.
• Ignoring tier balance — A phase covered only by Tier 3 reference skills lacks the opinionated guidance that Tier 1/2 skills provide. Flag this as partial coverage, not full coverage.
• Static analysis only — Coverage on paper does not mean coverage in practice. Note if skills exist but are likely underused (e.g., too complex, too niche).
• Recommending skills for every gap — Not every gap needs a skill. Some phases are better served by external tools, team processes, or existing documentation. Recommend skills only where agent assistance adds clear value.