AgentStack
Browse Sign in
Browse Why AgentStack Sell Docs
Sign in
SKILL verified Apache-2.0 Self-run

Kiro Validate Design

skill-studiogadget-skills-kiro-validate-design · by studiogadget

Interactive technical design quality review and validation

No reviews yet
0 installs
22 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-studiogadget-skills-kiro-validate-design

✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →

  • Prompt-injection patterns
  • Secret / credential exfiltration
  • Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
  • Untrusted network calls
  • Known-malicious package signatures

What it can access

  • Network access No
  • Filesystem access No
  • Shell / process execution No
  • Environment & secrets No
  • Dynamic code execution No

From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.

View the full security report →

Verified badge

Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.

AgentStack Verified badge Links to your public security report.
[![AgentStack Verified](https://agentstack.voostack.com/badges/verified.svg)](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-studiogadget-skills-kiro-validate-design)

Reliability & compatibility

Security review passed
0 installs to date
no reviews yet
3mo ago

Declared compatibility

Claude CodeClaude Desktop

Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.

Preview Execution monitoring

We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.

How agent discovery & health will work →
Are you the author of Kiro Validate Design? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

Technical Design Validation

  • Mission: Conduct interactive quality review of technical design to ensure readiness for implementation
  • Success Criteria:
  • Critical issues identified (maximum 3 most important concerns)
  • Balanced assessment with strengths recognized
  • Clear GO/NO-GO decision with rationale
  • Actionable feedback for improvements if needed

Core Task

Interactive design quality review for feature $1 based on approved requirements and design document.

Execution Steps

  1. Gather Context:
  • Read docs/specs/$1/spec.json for language and metadata
  • Read docs/specs/$1/requirements.md for requirements
  • Read docs/specs/$1/design.md for design document
  • Core steering context: product.md, tech.md, structure.md
  • Additional steering files only when directly relevant to architecture boundaries, integrations, runtime prerequisites, domain rules, security/performance constraints, or team conventions that affect implementation readiness
  • Relevant local agent skills or playbooks only when they clearly match the feature's host environment or use case and provide review-relevant context
Parallel Research

The following research areas are independent and can be executed in parallel:

  1. Context & rules loading: Spec documents, core steering, task-relevant extra steering, relevant local agent skills/playbooks, and rules/design-review.md from this skill's directory for review criteria
  2. Codebase pattern survey: Gather existing architecture patterns, naming conventions, and component structure from the codebase to use as reference during review

If multi-agent is enabled, spawn sub-agents for each area above. Otherwise execute sequentially.

After all parallel research completes, synthesize findings for review.

  1. Execute Design Review:
  • Reference conversation history when available: leverage prior requirements discussion and user's stated design intent
  • Follow design-review.md process: Analysis → Critical Issues → Strengths → GO/NO-GO
  • Limit to 3 most important concerns
  • Engage interactively with user — ask clarifying questions, propose alternatives
  • Use language specified in spec.json for output
  1. Decision and Next Steps:
  • Clear GO/NO-GO decision with rationale
  • Provide specific actionable next steps (see Next Phase below)

Important Constraints

  • Quality assurance, not perfection seeking: Accept acceptable risk
  • Critical focus only: Maximum 3 issues, only those significantly impacting success
  • Conversation-aware: Leverage discussion history for requirements context and user intent when available
  • Interactive approach: Engage in dialogue, ask clarifying questions, propose alternatives
  • Balanced assessment: Recognize both strengths and weaknesses
  • Actionable feedback: All suggestions must be implementable
  • Context Discipline: Start with core steering and expand only with review-relevant steering or use-case-aligned local agent skills/playbooks

Tool Guidance

  • Read first: Load spec, core steering, relevant local playbooks/agent skills, and rules before review
  • Grep if needed: Search codebase for pattern validation or integration checks
  • Interactive: Engage with user throughout the review process

Output Description

Provide output in the language specified in spec.json with:

  1. Review Summary: Brief overview (2-3 sentences) of design quality and readiness
  2. Critical Issues: Maximum 3, following design-review.md format
  3. Design Strengths: 1-2 positive aspects
  4. Final Assessment: GO/NO-GO decision with rationale and next steps

Format Requirements:

  • Use Markdown headings for clarity
  • Follow design-review.md output format
  • Keep summary concise

Safety & Fallback

Error Scenarios

  • Missing Design: If design.md doesn't exist, stop with message: "Run /kiro-spec-design $1 first to generate design document"
  • Design Not Generated: If design phase not marked as generated in spec.json, warn but proceed with review
  • Empty Steering Directory: Warn user that project context is missing and may affect review quality
  • Language Undefined: Default to English (en) if spec.json doesn't specify language

Next Phase: Task Generation

If Design Passes Validation (GO Decision):

  • Review feedback and apply changes if needed
  • Run /kiro-spec-tasks $1 to generate implementation tasks
  • Or /kiro-spec-tasks $1 -y to auto-approve and proceed directly

If Design Needs Revision (NO-GO Decision):

  • Address critical issues identified
  • Re-run /kiro-spec-design $1 with improvements
  • Re-validate with /kiro-validate-design $1

Note: Design validation is recommended but optional. Quality review helps catch issues early.

Source & license

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

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

Reviews

No reviews yet, be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.