---

name: validation description: This skill should be used when the user asks to "validate requirements", "review requirements quality", "check requirements completeness", "verify traceability", "check INVEST compliance", "validate user stories", "requirements health check", "quality gate check", or when running /re:review validation.

Validation

Quick Actions & Routing

Command Integration

The /re:review command orchestrates requirements validation in GitHub Projects. This skill provides the methodology for what to validate and how—including the four-dimensional validation framework, quality thresholds, and fix patterns. Load this skill for deeper understanding of validation concepts or when you need guidance beyond what the command provides.

Overview

Requirements validation ensures that requirements at all levels (vision, epics, stories, tasks) are complete, consistent, high-quality, and traceable. Validation identifies issues early, reducing rework and improving implementation success. This skill provides the framework for systematic validation.

Purpose

Validation serves as the quality gate for requirements:

• Catches issues early: Before implementation begins
• Ensures traceability: Vision → Epics → Stories → Tasks chain is complete
• Verifies quality: INVEST criteria for stories, clear acceptance criteria
• Identifies gaps: Missing elements, broken links, incomplete coverage

Four-Dimensional Validation Framework

Perform validation across four dimensions:

Validation Process Overview

Step 1: Gather Requirements

Retrieve all items from GitHub Project:

Copygh project item-list [project-number] --format json

Categorize by Type: Vision, Epic, Story, Task. For each item, read full content:

Copygh issue view [issue-number] --repo [repo] --json body,title,labels

Step 2: Apply Completeness Checks

Verify required elements exist at each level. See references/completeness-checks.md for detailed checklists.

Quick summary by level:

Step 3: Apply Consistency Checks

Verify alignment and traceability. See references/consistency-checks.md for detailed checks.

Key checks:

• Every epic links to vision
• Every story links to an epic
• Every task links to a story
• No orphaned issues
• Consistent terminology and labels
• Child priorities don't exceed parent priorities

Step 4: Apply Quality Checks

Validate requirements meet quality standards. See references/invest-criteria.md for INVEST details.

INVEST criteria for stories:

Acceptance criteria quality:

• Specific and unambiguous
• Testable and verifiable
• Observable outcomes
• Minimum 3-5 per story/task

Step 5: Generate Validation Report

Format findings using the standard report template. See references/report-template.md.

Report sections:

1. Executive Summary (dimensions + overall status)
2. Requirements Inventory (counts by level)
3. Critical Issues (must fix)
4. Warnings (should address)
5. INVEST Compliance (for stories)
6. Coverage Analysis
7. Recommendations (prioritized)
8. Next Steps

Step 6: Offer to Fix Issues

After presenting report, offer assistance:

• Auto-fix: Automatically fix where possible
• Guided fix: Walk through each issue
• Skip: Review only, no changes

See references/fix-patterns.md for common fix approaches.

Quality Thresholds

Use these thresholds for pass/warning/fail assessment. See references/quality-thresholds.md for details.

Issue Severity Classification

Critical Issues (Must Fix)

Block progress and must be resolved:

• Missing vision (no vision issue exists)
• Broken traceability (orphaned items without parents)
• Missing acceptance criteria (cannot verify completion)
• Incomplete scope definitions

Warnings (Should Address)

Quality issues that should be fixed but don't block:

• Oversized stories (>5 days)
• INVEST violations
• Priority imbalances (>60% Must Have)
• Vague task descriptions

Best Practices

Be Thorough but Pragmatic

• Focus on actionable findings
• Distinguish critical from nice-to-have
• Don't be pedantic about minor style issues

Provide Actionable Guidance

• Every issue should have a clear fix
• Reference specific issue numbers
• Group recommendations by priority

Validate Iteratively

• Re-run validation after fixes
• Use as quality gate before sprint planning
• Recommend periodic reviews (weekly/monthly)

Reference Files

Load references as needed:

Examples

Working examples that can be copied and adapted:

Related Skills

Load these skills when validation reveals needs beyond this skill's scope: