Kiro Validate GapSAFE
Turn approved specs into long-running autonomous implementation. A minimal, adaptable SDD harness with Agent Skills for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Copilot, Windsurf, OpenCode, Gemini CLI, and Antigravity.
Overview
Turn approved specs into long-running autonomous implementation. A minimal, adaptable SDD harness with Agent Skills for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Copilot, Windsurf, OpenCode, Gemini CLI, and Antigravity.
4504485f1027OBSERVED · 2026-10-07What it tells the agent
The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.
---
name: kiro-validate-gap
description: Analyze implementation gap between requirements and existing codebase
metadata:
shared-rules: "gap-analysis.md"
---
# Implementation Gap Validation
<background_information>
- **Mission**: Analyze the gap between requirements and existing codebase to inform implementation strategy
- **Success Criteria**:
- Comprehensive understanding of existing codebase patterns and components
- Clear identification of missing capabilities and integration challenges
- Multiple viable implementation approaches evaluated
- Technical research needs identified for design phase
</background_information>
<instructions>
## Core Task
Analyze implementation gap for feature **$1** based on approved requirements and existing codebase.
## Execution Steps
1. **Load Context**:
- Read `{{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/$1/spec.json` for language and metadata
- Read `{{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/$1/requirements.md` for requirements
- Core steering context: `product.md`, `tech.md`, `structure.md`
- Additional steering files only when directly relevant to the feature's domain rules, integrations, runtime prerequisites, compliance/security constraints, or existing product boundaries
- Use explicitly requested skills and task-relevant local skills/playbooks, including design, accessibility, and UX. Select by description and read only needed guidance, even for small tasks; preserve required checks and host/project rules.
2. **Read Analysis Guidelines**:
- Read `rules/gap-analysis.md` from this skill's directory for comprehensive analysis framework
#### Parallel Research
The following research areas are independent and can be executed in parallel:
1. **Codebase analysis**: Existing implementations, architecture patterns, integration points, extension possibilities
2. **External dependency research**: Dependency compatibility, version constraints, known integration challenges (when needed)
3. **Context loading**: Requirements, core steering, task-relevant extra steering, relevant local agent skills/playbooks, and gap-analysis rules
If multi-agent is enabled, spawn sub-agents for each area above. Otherwise execute sequentially.
After all parallel research completes, synthesize findings for gap analysis.
3. **Execute Gap Analysis**:
- Follow gap-analysis.md framework for thorough investigation
- Analyze existing codebase using Grep and Read tools
- Use WebSearch/WebFetch for external dependency research if needed
- Evaluate multiple implementation approaches (extend/new/hybrid)
- Use language specified in spec.json for output
4. **Generate Analysis Document**:
- Create comprehensive gap analysis following the output guidelines in gap-analysis.md
- Present multiple viable options with trade-offs
- Flag areas requiring further research
5. **Write Gap Analysis to Disk**:
**Write the gap analysis to disk so it survives session boundaries and can be referenced during design phase.**
- Save the gap analysis to `{{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/$1/research.md`
- If the file already exists, append the new analysis (separated by a horizontal rule `---`) rather than overwriting previous research
- Verify the file was written by reading it back
## Important Constraints
- **Information over Decisions**: Provide analysis and options, not final implementation choices
- **Multiple Options**: Present viable alternatives when applicable
- **Thorough Investigation**: Use tools to deeply understand existing codebase
- **Explicit Gaps**: Clearly flag areas needing research or investigation
- **Context Discipline**: Start with core steering and expand only with analysis-relevant steering or local skills/playbooks selected above
</instructions>
## Tool Guidance
- **Read first**: Load spec, core steering, relevant local playbooks/agent skills, and rules before analysis
- **Grep extensively**: Search codebase for patterns, conventions, and integration points
- **WebSearch/WebFetch**: Research external dependencies and best practices when needed
- **Write last**: Generate analysis only after complete investigation
## Output Description
Provide output in the language specified in spec.json with:
1. **Analysis Summary**: Brief overview (3-5 bullets) of scope, challenges, and recommendations
2. **Document Status**: Confirm analysis approach used
3. **Next Steps**: Guide user on proceeding to design phase
**Format Requirements**:
- Use Markdown headings for clarity
- Keep summary concise (under 300 words)
- Detailed analysis follows gap-analysis.md output guidelines
## Safety & Fallback
### Error Scenarios
- **Missing Requirements**: If requirements.md doesn't exist, stop with message: "Run `/kiro-spec-requirements $1` first to generate requirements"
- **Requirements Not Approved**: If requirements not approved, warn user but proceed (gap analysis can inform requirement revisions)
- **Empty Steering Directory**: Warn user that project context is missing and may affect analysis quality
- **Complex Integration Unclear**: Flag for comprehensive research in design phase rather than blocking
- **Language Undefined**: Default to English (`en`) if spec.json doesn't specify language
### Next Phase: Design Generation
**If Gap Analysis Complete**:
- Review gap analysis insights
- Run `/kiro-spec-design $1` to create technical design document
- Or `/kiro-spec-design $1 -y` to auto-approve requirements and proceed directly
**Note**: Gap analysis is optional but recommended for brownfield projects to inform design decisions.Trust audit
SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.
| Layer | What it checks | Result |
|---|---|---|
| L0 | Provenance & inventory | PASS |
| L1 | Static analysis of the code | NA |
| L2 | Instruction surface (what it tells the agent) | PASS |
| L3 | Class-specific surface | PASS |
| L4 | Behavioural (sandbox) | SKIPPED |
What the source does
- Filesystem
- none-observed
- Network
- none-observed
- Shell
- none-observed
- Dependencies
- pinned
- Secrets in source
- none-found
Findings (0)
No findings outside the package's declared scope.
Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.
4504485f1027full audit observations/trust-audit/skill/gotalab__kiro-validate-gap.json · Report an issue / request a re-scanAudit history
Every audit this skill has had.
| Date | Source | Verdict | Grade | Score | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-07 | 4504485f1027 | SAFE | B | 89 | first audit |
Questions
What does the Kiro Validate Gap skill do?
Turn approved specs into long-running autonomous implementation. A minimal, adaptable SDD harness with Agent Skills for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Copilot, Windsurf, OpenCode, Gemini CLI, and Antigravity.
Is Kiro Validate Gap safe to install?
The audit found nothing in the source that contradicts what it says it does, and graded it B (89/100). Grade A is held back for packages that have also passed a sandboxed behavioural run, which is why a clean skill reads B.
What can Kiro Validate Gap access on my machine?
The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.
How current is this page?
The grade is for one exact copy of the source (4504485f1027), read on 2026-10-07. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.