597 lines
15 KiB
Markdown
597 lines
15 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: gap-analysis
|
|
description: Route-aware gap analysis. For Brownfield - uses /speckit.analyze to compare specs against implementation. For Greenfield - validates spec completeness and asks about target tech stack for new implementation. This is Step 4 of 6 in the reverse engineering process.
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Gap Analysis (Route-Aware)
|
|
|
|
**Step 4 of 6** in the Reverse Engineering to Spec-Driven Development process.
|
|
|
|
**Estimated Time:** 15 minutes
|
|
**Prerequisites:** Step 3 completed (`.specify/` directory exists with specifications)
|
|
**Output:** Route-specific analysis and implementation roadmap
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Configuration Check (FIRST STEP!)
|
|
|
|
**CRITICAL:** Check detection type and route:
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
# Load state file
|
|
DETECTION_TYPE=$(cat .stackshift-state.json | jq -r '.detection_type // .path')
|
|
ROUTE=$(cat .stackshift-state.json | jq -r '.route // .path')
|
|
|
|
echo "Detection: $DETECTION_TYPE (what kind of app)"
|
|
echo "Route: $ROUTE (how to spec it)"
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Routes:**
|
|
- **greenfield** → Building NEW app (tech-agnostic specs)
|
|
- **brownfield** → Managing EXISTING app (tech-prescriptive specs)
|
|
|
|
**Detection Types:**
|
|
- **generic** → Standard application
|
|
- **monorepo-service** → Service in a monorepo
|
|
- **nx-app** → Nx workspace application
|
|
- **turborepo-package** → Turborepo package
|
|
- **lerna-package** → Lerna package
|
|
|
|
**Based on route, this skill behaves differently!**
|
|
|
|
**Examples:**
|
|
- Monorepo Service + Greenfield → Analyze spec completeness for platform migration
|
|
- Monorepo Service + Brownfield → Compare specs vs current implementation
|
|
- Nx App + Greenfield → Validate specs for rebuild (framework-agnostic)
|
|
- Nx App + Brownfield → Find gaps in current Nx/Angular implementation
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Greenfield Route: Spec Completeness Analysis
|
|
|
|
**Goal:** Validate specs are complete enough to build NEW application
|
|
|
|
**NOT analyzing:** Old codebase (we're not fixing it, we're building new)
|
|
**YES analyzing:** Spec quality, completeness, readiness
|
|
|
|
### Step 1: Review Spec Completeness
|
|
|
|
For each specification:
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
# Check each spec
|
|
for spec in .specify/memory/specifications/*.md; do
|
|
echo "Analyzing: $(basename $spec)"
|
|
|
|
# Look for ambiguities
|
|
grep "\[NEEDS CLARIFICATION\]" "$spec" || echo "No clarifications needed"
|
|
|
|
# Check for acceptance criteria
|
|
grep -A 10 "Acceptance Criteria" "$spec" || echo "⚠️ No acceptance criteria"
|
|
|
|
# Check for user stories
|
|
grep -A 5 "User Stories" "$spec" || echo "⚠️ No user stories"
|
|
done
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Step 2: Identify Clarification Needs
|
|
|
|
**Common ambiguities in Greenfield specs:**
|
|
- UI/UX details missing (what should it look like?)
|
|
- Business rules unclear (what happens when...?)
|
|
- Data relationships ambiguous (how do entities relate?)
|
|
- Non-functional requirements vague (how fast? how secure?)
|
|
|
|
**Mark with [NEEDS CLARIFICATION]:**
|
|
```markdown
|
|
### Photo Upload Feature
|
|
- Users can upload photos [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: drag-drop or click-browse?]
|
|
- Photos stored in cloud [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: S3, Cloudinary, or Vercel Blob?]
|
|
- Max 10 photos [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: per fish or per tank?]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Step 3: Ask About Target Tech Stack
|
|
|
|
**For Greenfield, you're building NEW - need to choose stack!**
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
I've extracted the business logic into tech-agnostic specifications.
|
|
Now we need to decide what to build the NEW application in.
|
|
|
|
What tech stack would you like to use for the new implementation?
|
|
|
|
Examples:
|
|
A) Next.js 15 + React 19 + Prisma + PostgreSQL + Vercel
|
|
B) Python FastAPI + SQLAlchemy + PostgreSQL + AWS ECS
|
|
C) Ruby on Rails 7 + PostgreSQL + Heroku
|
|
D) Your choice: [describe your preferred stack]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Document choice** in Constitution for consistency.
|
|
|
|
### Step 4: Create Implementation Roadmap
|
|
|
|
**Greenfield roadmap focuses on BUILD ORDER:**
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# Greenfield Implementation Roadmap
|
|
|
|
## Tech Stack Selected
|
|
- Frontend: Next.js 15 + React 19
|
|
- Backend: Next.js API Routes
|
|
- Database: PostgreSQL + Prisma
|
|
- Auth: NextAuth.js
|
|
- Hosting: Vercel
|
|
|
|
## Build Phases
|
|
|
|
### Phase 1: Foundation (Week 1)
|
|
- Set up Next.js project
|
|
- Database schema with Prisma
|
|
- Authentication system
|
|
- Base UI components
|
|
|
|
### Phase 2: Core Features (Week 2-3)
|
|
- User management
|
|
- Fish tracking
|
|
- Tank management
|
|
- Water quality logging
|
|
|
|
### Phase 3: Advanced Features (Week 4)
|
|
- Photo upload
|
|
- Analytics dashboard
|
|
- Notifications
|
|
- Social features
|
|
|
|
## All Features are ❌ MISSING
|
|
(Greenfield = building from scratch)
|
|
|
|
Ready to proceed to:
|
|
- Step 5: Resolve clarifications
|
|
- Step 6: Implement features in new stack
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Brownfield Route: Implementation Gap Analysis
|
|
|
|
**Goal:** Identify gaps in EXISTING codebase implementation
|
|
|
|
**YES analyzing:** Old codebase vs specs
|
|
**Using:** /speckit.analyze to find gaps
|
|
|
|
### Step 1: Run /speckit.analyze
|
|
|
|
GitHub Spec Kit's built-in validation:
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
> /speckit.analyze
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**What it checks:**
|
|
- Specifications marked ✅ COMPLETE but implementation missing
|
|
- Implementation exists but not documented in specs
|
|
- Inconsistencies between related specifications
|
|
- Conflicting requirements across specs
|
|
- Outdated implementation status
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Process Overview
|
|
|
|
### Step 1: Run /speckit.analyze
|
|
|
|
GitHub Spec Kit's built-in validation:
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
> /speckit.analyze
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**What it checks:**
|
|
- Specifications marked ✅ COMPLETE but implementation missing
|
|
- Implementation exists but not documented in specs
|
|
- Inconsistencies between related specifications
|
|
- Conflicting requirements across specs
|
|
- Outdated implementation status
|
|
|
|
**Output example:**
|
|
```
|
|
Analyzing specifications vs implementation...
|
|
|
|
Issues Found:
|
|
|
|
1. user-authentication.md marked PARTIAL
|
|
- Spec says: Frontend login UI required
|
|
- Reality: No login components found in codebase
|
|
|
|
2. analytics-dashboard.md marked MISSING
|
|
- Spec exists but no implementation
|
|
|
|
3. Inconsistency detected:
|
|
- fish-management.md requires photo-upload feature
|
|
- photo-upload.md marked PARTIAL (upload API missing)
|
|
|
|
4. Orphaned implementation:
|
|
- src/api/notifications.ts exists
|
|
- No specification found for notifications feature
|
|
|
|
Summary:
|
|
- 3 COMPLETE features
|
|
- 4 PARTIAL features
|
|
- 5 MISSING features
|
|
- 2 inconsistencies
|
|
- 1 orphaned implementation
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
See [operations/run-speckit-analyze.md](operations/run-speckit-analyze.md)
|
|
|
|
### Step 2: Detailed Gap Analysis
|
|
|
|
Expand on `/speckit.analyze` findings with deeper analysis:
|
|
|
|
#### A. Review PARTIAL Features
|
|
|
|
For each ⚠️ PARTIAL feature:
|
|
- What exists? (backend, frontend, tests, docs)
|
|
- What's missing? (specific components, endpoints, UI)
|
|
- Why incomplete? (was it deprioritized? ran out of time?)
|
|
- Effort to complete? (hours estimate)
|
|
- Blockers? (dependencies, unclear requirements)
|
|
|
|
#### B. Review MISSING Features
|
|
|
|
For each ❌ MISSING feature:
|
|
- Is it actually needed? (or can it be deprioritized?)
|
|
- User impact if missing? (critical, important, nice-to-have)
|
|
- Implementation complexity? (simple, moderate, complex)
|
|
- Dependencies? (what must be done first)
|
|
|
|
#### C. Technical Debt Assessment
|
|
|
|
From `docs/reverse-engineering/technical-debt-analysis.md`:
|
|
- Code quality issues
|
|
- Missing tests (unit, integration, E2E)
|
|
- Documentation gaps
|
|
- Security vulnerabilities
|
|
- Performance bottlenecks
|
|
|
|
#### D. Identify Clarification Needs
|
|
|
|
Mark ambiguous areas with `[NEEDS CLARIFICATION]`:
|
|
- Unclear requirements
|
|
- Missing UX/UI details
|
|
- Undefined behavior
|
|
- Unspecified constraints
|
|
|
|
See [operations/detailed-gap-analysis.md](operations/detailed-gap-analysis.md)
|
|
|
|
### Step 3: Prioritize Implementation
|
|
|
|
Classify gaps by priority:
|
|
|
|
**P0 - Critical**
|
|
- Blocking major use cases
|
|
- Security vulnerabilities
|
|
- Data integrity issues
|
|
- Broken core functionality
|
|
|
|
**P1 - High Priority**
|
|
- Important for core user value
|
|
- High user impact
|
|
- Competitive differentiation
|
|
- Technical debt causing problems
|
|
|
|
**P2 - Medium Priority**
|
|
- Nice-to-have features
|
|
- Improvements to existing features
|
|
- Minor technical debt
|
|
- Edge cases
|
|
|
|
**P3 - Low Priority**
|
|
- Future enhancements
|
|
- Polish and refinements
|
|
- Non-critical optimizations
|
|
|
|
See [operations/prioritization.md](operations/prioritization.md)
|
|
|
|
### Step 4: Create Implementation Roadmap
|
|
|
|
Phase the work into manageable chunks:
|
|
|
|
**Phase 1: P0 Items** (~X hours)
|
|
- Complete critical features
|
|
- Fix security issues
|
|
- Unblock major workflows
|
|
|
|
**Phase 2: P1 Features** (~X hours)
|
|
- Build high-value features
|
|
- Address important technical debt
|
|
- Improve test coverage
|
|
|
|
**Phase 3: P2/P3 Enhancements** (~X hours or defer)
|
|
- Nice-to-have features
|
|
- Polish and refinements
|
|
- Optional improvements
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Output Format
|
|
|
|
Create `docs/gap-analysis-report.md` (supplementing Spec Kit's output):
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# Gap Analysis Report
|
|
|
|
**Date:** [Current Date]
|
|
**Based on:** /speckit.analyze + manual review
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Executive Summary
|
|
|
|
- **Overall Completion:** ~66%
|
|
- **Complete Features:** 3 (25%)
|
|
- **Partial Features:** 4 (33%)
|
|
- **Missing Features:** 5 (42%)
|
|
- **Critical Issues:** 2
|
|
- **Clarifications Needed:** 8
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Spec Kit Analysis Results
|
|
|
|
### Inconsistencies Detected by /speckit.analyze
|
|
|
|
1. **user-authentication.md** (PARTIAL)
|
|
- Spec: Frontend login UI required
|
|
- Reality: No login components exist
|
|
- Impact: Users cannot authenticate
|
|
|
|
2. **photo-upload.md → fish-management.md**
|
|
- fish-management depends on photo-upload
|
|
- photo-upload.md is PARTIAL (API incomplete)
|
|
- Impact: Fish photos cannot be uploaded
|
|
|
|
3. **Orphaned Code: notifications.ts**
|
|
- Implementation exists without specification
|
|
- Action: Create specification or remove code
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Gap Details
|
|
|
|
### Missing Features (❌ 5 features)
|
|
|
|
#### F003: Analytics Dashboard [P1]
|
|
**Specification:** `specs/analytics-dashboard.md`
|
|
**Status:** ❌ MISSING (not started)
|
|
**Impact:** Users cannot track metrics over time
|
|
**Effort:** ~8 hours
|
|
**Dependencies:** None
|
|
|
|
**Needs Clarification:**
|
|
- [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] What metrics to display?
|
|
- [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] Chart types (line, bar, pie)?
|
|
- [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] Real-time or daily aggregates?
|
|
|
|
#### F005: Social Features [P2]
|
|
...
|
|
|
|
### Partial Features (⚠️ 4 features)
|
|
|
|
#### F002: Fish Management [P0]
|
|
**Specification:** `specs/fish-management.md`
|
|
**Status:** ⚠️ PARTIAL
|
|
|
|
**Implemented:**
|
|
- ✅ Backend API (all CRUD endpoints)
|
|
- ✅ Fish list page
|
|
- ✅ Fish detail view
|
|
|
|
**Missing:**
|
|
- ❌ Fish profile edit page
|
|
- ❌ Photo upload UI (blocked by photo-upload.md)
|
|
- ❌ Bulk import feature
|
|
|
|
**Effort to Complete:** ~4 hours
|
|
**Blockers:** Photo upload API must be completed first
|
|
|
|
**Needs Clarification:**
|
|
- [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] Photo upload: drag-drop or click-browse?
|
|
- [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] Max photos per fish?
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Technical Debt
|
|
|
|
### High Priority (Blocking)
|
|
- Missing integration tests (0 tests, blocks deployment)
|
|
- No error handling in 8 API endpoints (causes crashes)
|
|
- Hardcoded AWS region (prevents multi-region)
|
|
|
|
### Medium Priority
|
|
- Frontend components lack TypeScript types
|
|
- No loading states in UI (poor UX)
|
|
- Missing rate limiting on API (security risk)
|
|
|
|
### Low Priority
|
|
- Inconsistent code formatting
|
|
- No dark mode support
|
|
- Missing accessibility labels
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Prioritized Roadmap
|
|
|
|
### Phase 1: P0 Critical (~12 hours)
|
|
|
|
**Goals:**
|
|
- Unblock core user workflows
|
|
- Fix security issues
|
|
- Complete essential features
|
|
|
|
**Tasks:**
|
|
1. Complete F002: Fish Management UI (~4h)
|
|
- Implement photo upload API
|
|
- Build fish edit page
|
|
- Connect to backend
|
|
|
|
2. Add error handling to all APIs (~3h)
|
|
|
|
3. Implement integration tests (~5h)
|
|
|
|
### Phase 2: P1 High Value (~20 hours)
|
|
|
|
**Goals:**
|
|
- Build analytics dashboard
|
|
- Implement notifications
|
|
- Improve test coverage
|
|
|
|
**Tasks:**
|
|
1. F003: Analytics Dashboard (~8h)
|
|
2. F006: Notification System (~6h)
|
|
3. Add rate limiting (~2h)
|
|
4. Improve TypeScript coverage (~4h)
|
|
|
|
### Phase 3: P2/P3 Enhancements (~TBD)
|
|
|
|
**Goals:**
|
|
- Add nice-to-have features
|
|
- Polish and refinements
|
|
|
|
**Tasks:**
|
|
1. F005: Social Features (~12h)
|
|
2. F007: Dark Mode (~6h)
|
|
3. F008: Admin Panel (~10h)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Clarifications Needed (8 total)
|
|
|
|
### Critical (P0) - 2 items
|
|
1. **F002 - Photo Upload:** Drag-drop, click-browse, or both?
|
|
2. **F004 - Offline Sync:** Full data or metadata only?
|
|
|
|
### Important (P1) - 4 items
|
|
3. **F003 - Analytics:** Which chart types and metrics?
|
|
4. **F006 - Notifications:** Email, push, or both?
|
|
5. **F003 - Data Refresh:** Real-time or daily aggregates?
|
|
6. **F006 - Alert Frequency:** Per event or digest?
|
|
|
|
### Nice-to-Have (P2) - 2 items
|
|
7. **F007 - Dark Mode:** Full theme or toggle only?
|
|
8. **F005 - Social:** Which social features (share, comment, like)?
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Recommendations
|
|
|
|
1. **Resolve P0 clarifications first** (Step 5: complete-spec)
|
|
2. **Focus on Phase 1** before expanding scope
|
|
3. **Use /speckit.implement** for systematic implementation
|
|
4. **Update specs as you go** to keep them accurate
|
|
5. **Run /speckit.analyze regularly** to catch drift
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Next Steps
|
|
|
|
1. Run complete-spec skill to resolve clarifications
|
|
2. Begin Phase 1 implementation
|
|
3. Use `/speckit.implement` for each feature
|
|
4. Update implementation status in specs
|
|
5. Re-run `/speckit.analyze` to validate progress
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## GitHub Spec Kit Integration
|
|
|
|
After gap analysis, leverage Spec Kit commands:
|
|
|
|
### Validate Continuously
|
|
```bash
|
|
# Re-run after making changes
|
|
> /speckit.analyze
|
|
|
|
# Should show fewer issues as you implement
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Implement Systematically
|
|
```bash
|
|
# Generate tasks for a feature
|
|
> /speckit.tasks user-authentication
|
|
|
|
# Implement step-by-step
|
|
> /speckit.implement user-authentication
|
|
|
|
# Updates spec status automatically
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Clarify Ambiguities
|
|
```bash
|
|
# Before implementing unclear features
|
|
> /speckit.clarify analytics-dashboard
|
|
|
|
# Interactive Q&A to fill gaps
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Success Criteria
|
|
|
|
After running this skill, you should have:
|
|
|
|
- ✅ `/speckit.analyze` results reviewed
|
|
- ✅ All inconsistencies documented
|
|
- ✅ PARTIAL features analyzed (what exists vs missing)
|
|
- ✅ MISSING features categorized
|
|
- ✅ Technical debt cataloged
|
|
- ✅ `[NEEDS CLARIFICATION]` markers added
|
|
- ✅ Priorities assigned (P0/P1/P2/P3)
|
|
- ✅ Phased implementation roadmap
|
|
- ✅ `docs/gap-analysis-report.md` created
|
|
- ✅ Ready to proceed to Step 5 (Complete Specification)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Next Step
|
|
|
|
Once gap analysis is complete, proceed to:
|
|
|
|
**Step 5: Complete Specification** - Use the complete-spec skill to resolve all `[NEEDS CLARIFICATION]` markers interactively.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Technical Notes
|
|
|
|
- `/speckit.analyze` is run first for automated checks
|
|
- Manual analysis supplements with deeper insights
|
|
- Gap report complements Spec Kit's output
|
|
- Keep both `.specify/memory/` specs and gap report updated
|
|
- Re-run `/speckit.analyze` frequently to track progress
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Route Comparison: What Gap Analysis Means
|
|
|
|
| Aspect | Greenfield | Brownfield |
|
|
|--------|-----------|-----------|
|
|
| **Analyzing** | Spec completeness | Existing code vs specs |
|
|
| **Goal** | Validate specs ready to build NEW | Find gaps in CURRENT implementation |
|
|
| **/speckit.analyze** | Skip (no old code to compare) | Run (compare specs to code) |
|
|
| **Gap Definition** | Missing requirements, ambiguities | Missing features, partial implementations |
|
|
| **Roadmap** | Build order for NEW app | Fill gaps in EXISTING app |
|
|
| **Tech Stack** | ASK user (choosing for new) | Already decided (current stack) |
|
|
| **All Features** | ❌ MISSING (building from scratch) | Mix of ✅⚠️❌ (some exist) |
|
|
|
|
**Key Insight:**
|
|
- **Greenfield:** Specs describe WHAT to build (old code doesn't matter) - Same for ALL detection types
|
|
- **Brownfield:** Specs describe current reality (validate against old code) - Same for ALL detection types
|
|
|
|
**Detection type doesn't change gap analysis approach** - it only affects what patterns were analyzed in Gear 2
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
**Remember:** Check route first! Greenfield analyzes SPECS, Brownfield analyzes IMPLEMENTATION.
|