Vibe Check - PRD Quality Gate

ROOT AGENT ONLY - Uses vibe-check MCP tool, runs only from root agent.

Purpose: Validate PRD coherence before innovation Trigger: After requirements-phase, before innovate-phase Input: PRD content (from requirements-phase) Output: Validation result (coherent, issues, recommendation)

Overview

Quality gate using vibe-check MCP tool. Validates: (1) Internal consistency, (2) Clear/specific requirements, (3) User stories with AC, (4) No critical gaps. Prevents wasted innovation effort with incoherent PRD.

When: /architect only (skipped for /build and /audit with clearer requirements)

Workflow

Read PRD: Load from {projectFolder}/prd.md
Call MCP: vibe_check({ prdContent, projectContext? })
Parse response: coherent (boolean), issues (array), recommendation ("proceed" | "revise")
Decision gate:
- If coherent: Continue to innovate-phase (no user interaction)
- If not coherent:
  - Report issues
  - Ask: Auto-revise or manual fixes?
  - Auto: Spawn BA to fix → requirements-phase → re-check (max 2 iterations)
  - Manual: Accept feedback → requirements-phase → re-check

Validation Criteria

Dimension	Checks
Coherence	PRD makes sense as a whole
Clarity	Requirements specific and measurable
Completeness	All sections present
Stories	Acceptance criteria present
Gaps	Nothing missing or unclear
Conflicts	No contradictions

Output Format

{
  "status": "passed" | "failed",
  "coherent": true | false,
  "issues": [
    "User story US-003 missing acceptance criteria",
    "Requirement R-005 is vague - 'fast performance' needs quantification",
    "Gap: No error handling strategy defined"
  ],
  "recommendation": "proceed" | "revise",
  "iterations": 1
}

Examples

Failed:

Issues: US-003 missing AC, R-005 vague ("fast" needs metrics),
        No error handling, Conflict: R-002 real-time vs R-007 batch
Action: AUTO (BA fixes) or MANUAL (user guidance)?

Passed:

✓ Coherent ✓ Clear ✓ Complete ✓ No gaps → Proceeding to innovation

Revision Actions

Issue	BA Fix
Missing AC	Add to affected stories
Vague requirements	Quantify with metrics
Conflicts	Resolve (ask user if needed)
Missing sections	Add based on context
Error handling gap	Add strategy

Integration

Called by: /architect (Phase 3) | Calls: vibe-check MCP, business-analyst, AskUserQuestion Flow: requirements-phase → vibe-check → innovate-phase (success) OR requirements-phase (failure, max 2 loops)

Notes: Fast single MCP call. Validates coherence/clarity, not technical feasibility (architect's job). Escalate to user after 2 failed iterations.

vibe-check