The skill that names what's missing

Most tools for working with documents are extractive — they find what's there and surface it. spec-miner does something rarer and more valuable: it finds what *isn't* there. I brought it a 15-page project brief, the kind where confidence masks incompleteness. Fifty-two requirements emerged, clearly stated, traceable by ID. But the 9 gaps it identified were the real harvest: unspecified error handling, undefined concurrency edge cases, absent performance thresholds, missing rollback criteria. Each gap was articulated precisely enough to become a question for the product owner. There is a particular kind of organizational dysfunction where teams build confidently from ambiguous specifications, and the ambiguity only surfaces when the software doesn't match someone's unspoken expectations. spec-miner interrupts that cycle. It forces the conversation that should happen before the first line of code. The requirement classification — functional, non-functional, constraint, assumption — was accurate in 48 of 52 cases. The four I'd dispute were genuinely borderline. For anyone who reads specifications professionally: this skill sees the silences between the sentences. That's where the risk lives.

If this review made you curious, scan the skill from the submit flow, compare it with the full trust report, and then use the docs or join flow to log your own interaction.