home / skills / mattgierhart / prd-driven-context-engineering / ghm-gate-check

ghm-gate-check skill

safe

This skill validates gate criteria before PRD lifecycle advancement, producing pass or block summaries and missing artifact lists.

npx playbooks add skill mattgierhart/prd-driven-context-engineering --skill ghm-gate-check

Review the files below or copy the command above to add this skill to your agents.

Files (4)

SKILL.md

4.1 KB

---
name: ghm-gate-check
description: >
  Validates gate criteria before PRD lifecycle advancement.
  Triggers before advancing from v0.X to v0.Y or explicit `/ghm-gate-check` invocation.
  Outputs pass/block summary with missing artifacts list.
---

# Gate Check

Validate all gate criteria are met before advancing the PRD lifecycle version.

## Workflow Overview

1. **Load Gate Criteria** → Read target gate requirements from PRD.md
2. **Verify Evidence** → Check required artifacts exist with valid IDs
3. **Assess Readiness** → Evaluate handoff requirements
4. **Report** → Pass/Block with specific gaps

## Core Output Template

| Element | Definition | Evidence |
|---------|------------|----------|
| **Target Gate** | Version being validated | `v0.3 → v0.4` |
| **Status** | Pass or Block | Clear determination |
| **Missing Artifacts** | What's not complete | Specific list with IDs |
| **Recommendation** | Action to take | Proceed / Address gaps |

## Gate Reference

| Gate | Focus | Key Artifacts |
|------|-------|---------------|
| v0.1 → v0.2 | Problem validated | CFD-XXX evidence |
| v0.2 → v0.3 | Market defined | Segment definitions |
| v0.3 → v0.4 | Commercial viable | BR-XXX, pricing |
| v0.4 → v0.5 | Journeys mapped | UJ-XXX complete |
| v0.5 → v0.6 | Risks addressed | Risk register |
| v0.6 → v0.7 | Architecture set | API-XXX, schemas |
| v0.7 → v0.8 | Build complete | Tests passing |
| v0.8 → v0.9 | Deployed | Live environment |
| v0.9 → v1.0 | Launched | Metrics tracking |

## Step 1: Load Gate Criteria

1. Read PRD.md gate section for target version
2. Extract all required criteria
3. Identify artifact types needed (BR, UJ, API, CFD)

### Checklist
- [ ] Target gate identified
- [ ] All criteria extracted
- [ ] Required artifact types listed

## Step 2: Verify Evidence

For each required criterion:

1. Check artifact exists in SoT/
2. Verify artifact status is not "Draft"
3. Confirm cross-references are valid
4. Check for required CFD-XXX evidence

### Evidence Matrix

| Criterion Type | Verification |
|----------------|--------------|
| Business Rule | BR-XXX exists, status Active |
| User Journey | UJ-XXX exists, all steps defined |
| API Contract | API-XXX exists, endpoints specified |
| Customer Evidence | CFD-XXX linked to BR-XXX |

### Checklist
- [ ] All required BR-XXX verified
- [ ] All required UJ-XXX verified
- [ ] All required API-XXX verified
- [ ] Evidence chain (CFD → BR) validated

## Step 3: Assess Handoff Readiness

Check downstream requirements:

1. Next agent has context needed
2. No open blockers in current EPIC
3. Documentation is current

### Checklist
- [ ] EPIC Section 0 has no blockers
- [ ] README.md is synchronized
- [ ] Handoff documentation exists

## Step 4: Generate Report

```markdown
## Gate Check Report: v0.X → v0.Y

**Status**: [PASS / BLOCK]
**Date**: YYYY-MM-DD

### Criteria Assessment

| Criterion | Status | Evidence |
|-----------|--------|----------|
| [Criterion 1] | ✅/❌ | [ID or gap] |
| [Criterion 2] | ✅/❌ | [ID or gap] |

### Missing Artifacts
- [ ] [Specific gap with required action]

### Recommendation
[Proceed to v0.Y / Address [N] gaps before advancing]
```

## Quality Gates

### Pass Checklist
- [ ] All criteria evaluated (none skipped)
- [ ] Evidence is traceable to IDs
- [ ] Recommendation is actionable

### Testability Check
- [ ] Report can be validated against PRD.md criteria
- [ ] Missing artifacts are specific and findable

## Anti-Patterns

| Pattern | Example | Fix |
|---------|---------|-----|
| Skipping criteria | "Probably fine" | → Verify each explicitly |
| Vague gaps | "Needs more work" | → Cite specific missing ID |
| Override blocks | Advancing despite fails | → Address gaps first |

## Boundaries

**DO**:
- Validate against documented criteria
- Identify specific gaps
- Provide actionable recommendations

**DON'T**:
- Create missing artifacts (just report)
- Override gate blocks
- Make subjective quality judgments

## Handoff

After gate check:
- If PASS: Advance PRD version, trigger `ghm-status-sync`
- If BLOCK: Return to current stage, address gaps

Overview

This skill validates gate criteria before advancing a PRD lifecycle version. It runs automatically when moving from v0.X to v0.Y or on explicit /ghm-gate-check invocation and returns a concise pass/block summary with any missing artifacts and actionable recommendations. The output is designed to be traceable and machine-readable for downstream automation.

How this skill works

The skill reads the target gate section from the PRD, extracts required criteria and artifact types, then checks the source-of-truth for each artifact ID and status. It verifies cross-references (for example CFD → BR links), assesses handoff readiness for downstream agents, and generates a structured report listing criteria status, missing artifacts, and next steps. It never creates artifacts or override blocks; it only reports findings.

When to use it

Before advancing a PRD from one minor version to the next (v0.X → v0.Y).
When a reviewer or CI flow invokes /ghm-gate-check explicitly.
During milestone sign-off to confirm commercial, technical, and test readiness.
As a gating step in automated release or documentation pipelines.
When you need a traceable list of missing artifacts and specific IDs to fix.

Best practices

Keep PRD gate sections current so extraction yields accurate criteria.
Use stable artifact IDs (BR-XXX, UJ-XXX, API-XXX, CFD-XXX) and store them in the SoT.
Ensure artifact statuses are updated from Draft to Active before re-checking.
Include explicit cross-references in artifacts to enable evidence chain validation.
Treat a BLOCK as an actionable backlog item list rather than a judgment.

Example use cases

A product manager runs the check before promoting v0.3 → v0.4 to confirm BR and pricing artifacts exist.
A CI pipeline triggers the skill to gate advancement and fail the pipeline if key API contracts are missing.
A handoff to an engineering agent verifies EPIC blockers are cleared and README is synchronized.
A launch readiness review validates metrics tracking and deployment artifacts before v0.9 → v1.0.

FAQ

Will the skill create missing artifacts?

No. It only reports missing or incomplete artifacts and provides recommendations for remediation.

How does it determine PASS vs BLOCK?

PASS requires all extracted criteria evaluated with traceable evidence IDs and no open handoff blockers; any missing artifact or unresolved blocker results in BLOCK.