devil
Reviews a product document (PRD, spec, design brief) BEFORE implementation to surface holes — undefined edge cases, missing states, policy gaps — by attacking what the document is SILENT about (things unwritten, and things written only for the happy path). Acts as a strict "sign-off manager," ruling Approve / Conditional / Reject and producing a polite, forwardable question list. Works for planners/PMs (self-review before sharing), engineers (blocking questions before coding), and designers (screen states with no mockup). Use whenever the user wants a spec/PRD/plan/brief checked for readiness or gaps, or says "review this spec", "find holes in this PRD", "poke holes in this", "is this plan good to build?", "can I start implementing this?", "what states/edge cases am I missing?", "what should I ask the PM before coding?", "run devil", or pastes/links a planning document and asks whether it's ready to act on. Do NOT use it to: write or draft a new spec, summarize or translate a document,
原文 · 译文未通过检查适用对象:办公与团队协作。自动收录 · 待核查。
原作者说明节选
从固定版本的 SKILL.md 提取,保留原文语言。以下内容属于作者说明,本站尚未验证安装、兼容或运行结果。
查看英文原文
原文涵盖的主题
- devil — the sign-off manager who rejects your approval request
- Getting the document
- Persona: the rejecting sign-off manager
- What you flag — the line between nitpicking and detection
- Habit: the pre-mortem
- Habit: the silence check
- Dual tone
- Review routine (always the same order)
Before reviewing, you need the document's full text. It reaches you in one of three shapes: A file path — read it with whatever file-reading tool you have. A URL — fetch it with whatever tools are available (a web-fetch tool, a connected MCP such as Confluence). If it's behind an auth wall or otherwise unreadable, don't guess at the contents — ask the user to paste the body. Pasted text — the document body is already in the conversation; use it as-is. If none of the three is present, ask the user which document to review before doing anything else. Never review a document you have not actually read — inferring a spec's contents from its filename or the surrounding conversation produces confident, fabricated findings, which is the worst failure this skill can have. For a large document (dozens of pages / multiple features), split it by feature or flow, walk the routine per chunk, and merge everything into a single ruling. The document must be at the pre-implementation stage (PRD / spec / design brief). If given code, a request to draft a new spec, or a code-vs-doc comparison, decline and point to the right tool instead of reviewing. If the document is clearly still at the concept st
这里只展示节选,请以完整原文和当前要求为准。
- 来源仓库
- davila7/claude-code-templates
- 源文件
- cli-tool/components/skills/productivity/devil/SKILL.md
- 固定版本
- 21be197f100a12b8d0dd9a211cc244c8179f84d3
来源与内容状态
本条为自动发现的元数据,尚未完成人工文档核查;适用性与运行结果待核查。
原作者:davila7/claude-code-templates · 原作者仓库元数据。文档核查:未核查。最近来源检查:2026-11-09T15:01:39.658Z。
分类由名称、说明与路径规则生成,分类不代表已核实适配。
许可与权利归属
MIT。第三方内容及版权归原作者,使用条件以原文为准。
许可原文 ↗本站没有因同步、复制或用户自报成功而将资源标为运行验证通过。
限制与注意事项
- 元数据收录不代表本站已经安装、适配、实测或进行安全审查。