Inspect code, docs, issues, and evidence before deciding.
Scanned 9/6/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add BeforeWave/forma --skill inspect --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Inspect?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/beforewave-inspect-forma)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: inspect
description: "Inspect code, docs, issues, and evidence before deciding."
---
# Forma Inspect
Inspect code, docs, issues, and evidence before deciding.
## Interaction Semantics
- Use this skill as a read-only grounding producer between plan intent and final plan files.
- Inspect only the repository context needed to produce known facts, options, gaps, and a handoff for finalization.
- Confirm facts and make non-authoritative recommendations, but do not accept user-owned product or engineering decisions.
- Do not write `plan.md`, do not write `tasks.md`, and do not start implementation.
## Workflow
- Use this skill after the plan stage has settled enough intent to provide bounded fact questions and before the finalize stage writes `plan.md` or `tasks.md`.
- Read the caller's `Settled Intent`, `Fact Questions`, `Decisions Waiting On Those Facts`, and requested `Return To` when present; do not broaden the inspection beyond the facts needed to unblock those decisions.
- Inspect repository context read-only and produce `Source Material`, `Confirmed Facts`, `Inferences`, `Options Considered`, `Validation Surfaces`, `Blocking Gaps`, `Recommended Handoff`, and `Return To`.
- For behavior, architecture, ownership, or integration grounding, load `references/engineering-quality-model.md` and gather the project rules, code reality, and proof surfaces that define the applicable quality bar.
- Keep facts, inferences, and recommendations separate. Every confirmed fact must name the exact source path or ref that supports it; every inference or recommendation is non-authoritative until the user accepts it.
- Use `Return To: plan` when grounding was requested before `proposal-ready`, or whenever an option, recommendation, or gap could change the proposal. Use `Return To: lock` only when the caller supplied an already-confirmed proposal and grounding found no plan-changing decision or gap.
- Leave unresolved choices in `Blocking Gaps`; the plan stage must present them to the user, and the finalize stage may copy only confirmed facts and user-approved recommendations.
## Load As Needed
- `references/engineering-quality-model.md`
## Requirements
- Use this skill only after the requirement intent is settled enough to know what repository facts need grounding.
- Keep the repository work read-only and do not create, edit, or stage files.
- Output relevant paths, viable options, unresolved gaps, validation surfaces, and a concise handoff that the finalize stage can cite.
- Each `Confirmed Facts` item must cite the source path or ref it came from and must not include inferred intent, preference, plan decisions, or implementation recommendations.
- Put repository observations that require interpretation under `Inferences` and label them non-authoritative.
- Put possible implementation choices under `Options Considered`; put the recommended option and rationale in `Recommended Handoff` without marking it accepted; put unresolved decisions in `Blocking Gaps`.
- Include `Source Material` with only the refs actually used, such as the current conversation, a GitHub issue URL, a reviewed solution package, or a prior grounding brief.
- Use the generic inspect stage only when no specialized grounding producer owns the domain. For activity solution work, direct activity requirement-to-solution replaces generic grounding; for Go refactor planning, direct Go refactor planning replaces generic grounding.
- Do not treat a plan draft as the authoritative requirement source. Cite the original source material and any reviewed grounding handoff separately.
## Output
- Return the grounding handoff with `Return To`, Source Material, Confirmed Facts, Inferences, Options Considered, Recommended Handoff, Validation Surfaces, and Blocking Gaps.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!