Vibe Spec Vs Code Audit

vibe-spec-vs-code-audit

Specs drift from code. Code drifts from specs. This skill catches the gaps.

When to Use This Skill

• Implementation of a spec/design doc is claimed complete
• After a major refactor that should still conform to a spec
• During periodic compliance checks
• When debugging unexpected behavior (maybe the code doesn't match the spec)

When NOT to Use This Skill

• No spec or design doc exists (nothing to compare against)
• The spec is explicitly marked as aspirational/future
• Code was intentionally diverged with documented reasons

Steps

1. Identify the spec — Find the specification document (design doc, PRD section, API spec, etc.)

1. Identify the implementation — Find the code files that implement this spec

1. Line-by-line comparison — For each requirement/section in the spec:

• Find the corresponding code
• Check: Does the code match the spec exactly?
• If divergent: Record as a GAP

1. Classify each gap:

• ID: GAP-[section]-[number] (e.g., GAP-AUTH-001)
• Type: Missing (spec says X, code has nothing) / Incorrect (spec says X, code does Y) / Extra (code has X, spec doesn't mention it)
• Severity: Critical (breaks core functionality) / High (wrong behavior) / Medium (incomplete) / Low (cosmetic)

1. Report:

Output Format

Spec vs Code Audit

Spec: [document name/path] Implementation: [code path(s)] Gaps Found: X (Y critical, Z high)

| GAP ID | Type | Severity | Spec Says | Code Does | |--------|------|----------|-----------|-----------| | GAP-AUTH-001 | Missing | Critical | "Tokens expire after 24h" | No expiration logic found |

Top 3 Risks

1. [Most dangerous gap]

Recommended Fix Order

1. [Fix critical gaps first]

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

• Author: ash1794
• Source: ash1794/vibe-engineering
• License: MIT

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.