Mentioned Coverage Gate
Input: $ARGUMENTS (the original user message or list of items to verify coverage for)
Purpose
When a user mentions multiple things (frames, stakeholders, dimensions, categories, etc.), this gate verifies that EVERY mentioned item was:
- Identified/extracted
- Checked against existing coverage
- Either covered or explicitly noted as a gap
- Gaps filled or explained
Why this gate exists: It’s easy to address some items and unconsciously drop others. This gate prevents that.
Step 1: EXTRACT All Mentioned Items
Parse the user’s input and create an exhaustive list of everything they mentioned.
Categories to look for:
- Explicit lists (numbered, bulleted, comma-separated)
- Items in tables
- Items in examples
- Implicit items (references to “all of these”, “each of”, “etc.”)
- Meta-items (“also” statements, “and” connectors)
Output format:
EXTRACTED ITEMS:
1. [item 1] - from: [where in message]
2. [item 2] - from: [where in message]
...
N. [item N] - from: [where in message]
Total: N items extracted
Gate check: Did I extract ALL items, including:
- Items explicitly listed?
- Items implied by “etc.” or “and so on”?
- Items referenced with “all of these”?
- Items mentioned in passing?
- Meta-requests about the items themselves?
Step 2: CHECK Coverage for Each Item
For each extracted item, determine if it’s covered in the system.
Check locations:
- Universal guess library files (
data/guess_libraries/universal/*.md) - Domain guess library files (
data/guess_libraries/*.md) - Skills (
skills/*/SKILL.md) - Procedures in YAML files
Output format:
| Item | Covered? | Location | Specific Question/Entry |
|------|----------|----------|------------------------|
| [item 1] | YES/NO/PARTIAL | [file] | [Q# or entry] |
| [item 2] | YES/NO/PARTIAL | [file] | [Q# or entry] |
...
Coverage definitions:
- YES: Explicit question-guess entry exists for this exact concept
- PARTIAL: Related content exists but doesn’t fully address the item
- NO: No coverage found
Step 3: IDENTIFY Gaps
Create explicit list of items not covered or only partially covered.
Output format:
GAPS IDENTIFIED:
1. [item] - Status: [NO/PARTIAL]
- What's missing: [specific gap]
- Why it matters: [impact of not having this]
- Suggested file: [where it should go]
2. [item] - Status: [NO/PARTIAL]
...
Total gaps: N items
Step 4: FILL or EXPLAIN Gaps
For each gap, either:
- CREATE the missing content (new file or new questions in existing file)
- EXPLAIN why it shouldn’t be created (out of scope, duplicate, etc.)
If creating:
CREATED:
- [item] → [new file or location]
- Questions added: [count]
- Entries added: [count]
If explaining:
NOT CREATED (with reason):
- [item] → Reason: [why not needed]
Step 5: VERIFY Complete Coverage
After filling gaps, run coverage check again to confirm 100% coverage.
Final output format:
FINAL COVERAGE VERIFICATION:
| Item | Status | Location |
|------|--------|----------|
| [item 1] | ✓ COVERED | [file:Q#] |
| [item 2] | ✓ COVERED | [file:Q#] |
...
Coverage: N/N items (100%)
Gate FAILS if:
- Any item shows “NOT COVERED” without explanation
- Any item was dropped (not in final table)
- Total in final table ≠ Total extracted in Step 1
Step 6: META-CHECK
Verify the gate itself was applied correctly:
- Did I extract ALL items from user message?
- Did I check EVERY extracted item?
- Did I create or explain EVERY gap?
- Does final count match initial count?
- Did user mention any META-requests about the items that I also need to address?
Quick Reference Table
| Step | Action | Output |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Extract | List of N items |
| 2 | Check | Coverage table |
| 3 | Identify | Gap list |
| 4 | Fill/Explain | Created/Explained list |
| 5 | Verify | Final 100% coverage table |
| 6 | Meta-check | Self-verification |
Example Application
User says: “Make sure frames, stakeholders, time horizons, and dimensions are all covered”
Step 1 extraction:
EXTRACTED ITEMS:
1. frames - explicit
2. stakeholders - explicit
3. time horizons - explicit
4. dimensions - explicit
5. "all covered" - meta-request for verification
Total: 5 items (4 content + 1 meta)
Step 2 check:
| Item | Covered? | Location |
|------|----------|----------|
| frames | YES | 104_interpretation_frames.md |
| stakeholders | YES | 105_stakeholder_archetypes.md |
| time horizons | YES | 106_time_horizons.md |
| dimensions | PARTIAL | 01-11 exist but DEGREE missing |
| "all covered" meta | NO | No coverage verification file |
Step 3 gaps:
1. dimensions/DEGREE - PARTIAL → Need 107_degree_magnitude.md
2. "all covered" meta → Need this very procedure
Step 4 fill:
CREATED:
- DEGREE → 107_degree_magnitude.md (11Q, 51 entries)
- coverage gate → skills/mcg/SKILL.md
Step 5 verify:
Coverage: 5/5 items (100%)
When To Use This Gate
ALWAYS use after:
- User lists multiple items to address
- User says “all of these”, “each of”, “make sure”
- Complex multi-aspect analysis
- Creating new categories or files
SIGNS you need this gate:
- User repeats a request (may have been dropped)
- User says “did you consider X?” (may have been missed)
- You feel like you might have missed something
Integration
This gate should be invoked:
- Automatically after
/spd(verify all discovered aspects addressed) - Manually when user mentions multiple items
- As final check before declaring work complete
→ Pairs with: /comprehensive_aspects (general completeness)
→ Pairs with: /vbo (claim verification)
→ Pairs with: 100_coverage_strategy.md (coverage modes)