spec

Spec

Creates a detailed technical specification for one unit of work.

When to Use This Skill

• After research skill has created research artifacts
• When creating spec.md and checklist.md for any decomposed spec
• To produce implementable artifacts

Prerequisites

• FEATURE.md exists for the parent feature
• spec-research.md exists in the spec folder (created by research skill)

---

Workflow Overview

Locate Feature + Spec
       │
       ▼
Verify spec-research.md exists
       │
       ▼
Gather Clarifications (upfront)
       │
       ▼
Parallel Draft Sections
       │
       ▼
Assemble Full Spec
       │
       ▼
Coherence Check (spec-coherence-checker)
       │
       ├─ FAIL (2x) → ESCALATE (Andon)
       │
       ▼
Autonomous Validation (or Human Review if interactive)
       │
       ▼
Generate Checklist
       │
       ▼
Checklist Validation (checklist-completeness-validator)
       │
       ├─ FAIL → Fix gaps
       │
       ▼
QC Validation (spec-qc agent)
       │
       ├─ FAIL → Address deltas, re-run QC
       │
       ▼
Commit to main
       │
       ▼
Output: Spec ready for implementation

---

Step 1: Setup

Locate Feature and Spec

1. Ask user which feature and spec to work on
2. Read features/{domain}/{feature}/FEATURE.md
3. List existing specs: ls features/{domain}/{feature}/specs/
4. Confirm target spec folder exists (created by research skill)

Create tmp Directory

mkdir -p features/{domain}/{feature}/specs/{NN}-{spec-name}/tmp

---

Step 2: Verify spec-research.md

The research skill should have already created spec-research.md for ALL specs. Verify it exists:

ls features/{domain}/{feature}/specs/{NN}-{spec-name}/spec-research.md

If missing: Run research skill first. Do not proceed without spec-research.md.

Read the spec-research.md to understand:

• Problem context
• Interface contracts
• Test plan
• Key decisions

---

Step 3: Gather Clarifications (Upfront)

Before drafting, identify and resolve any ambiguities:

1. Review spec-research.md for open questions
2. Identify gaps in requirements, scope, or technical approach
3. Use AskUserQuestion for any decisions needed

Example clarification points:

• Unclear scope boundaries
• Multiple valid approaches for a requirement
• Missing success criteria
• Dependency questions

Clarification Checklist

Before drafting, verify:

• All data fields in interface contracts exist in documented APIs
• Each "Mocks Needed" item maps to real code or a spec
• No open questions remain in spec-research.md
• Scope boundaries are clear (what's in vs out)

Use AskUserQuestion for any failures.

Goal: Have all information needed to draft a complete spec. No questions should arise during drafting.

---

Step 4: Parallel Draft Sections

Launch 4 parallel agents in a SINGLE message:

Agent 1: Overview

subagent_type: "general-purpose"
model: "haiku"
run_in_background: true
description: "Draft Overview section"
prompt: "Read {spec-path}/spec-research.md for context.
Draft the Overview section: what is being built and how.
Write to {spec-path}/tmp/overview.md.
Return 'DONE' when complete."

Agent 2: Out Of Scope

subagent_type: "general-purpose"
model: "haiku"
run_in_background: true
description: "Draft Out Of Scope section"
prompt: "Read {spec-path}/spec-research.md for context.
Draft Out Of Scope: numbered items with rationale for each exclusion.

For each Out of Scope item, classify as one of:
- **Descoped:** Not part of this feature (no action needed)
- **Deferred to {spec-name}:** Will be done in named spec (verify spec exists)
- **⚠️ Unassigned:** Needs to be done but no spec owns it yet

Rules:
- Never write 'will be in another spec' without naming the spec
- ⚠️ Unassigned items flag gaps for resolution before finalizing

Write to {spec-path}/tmp/out-of-scope.md.
Return 'DONE' when complete."

Agent 3: Functional Requirements

subagent_type: "general-purpose"
model: "haiku"
run_in_background: true
description: "Draft Requirements section"
prompt: "Read {spec-path}/spec-research.md for context.
Draft Functional Requirements using FR1/FR2/FR3 format.
Each FR MUST include Success Criteria.
Write to {spec-path}/tmp/requirements.md.
Return 'DONE' when complete."

Agent 4: Technical Design

subagent_type: "general-purpose"
model: "haiku"
run_in_background: true
description: "Draft Technical Design section"
prompt: "Read {spec-path}/spec-research.md for context.
Draft Technical Design including:
- Files to Reference
- Files to Create/Modify
- Data Flow
- Edge Cases
Write to {spec-path}/tmp/technical-design.md.
Return 'DONE' when complete."

Wait for all agents using TaskOutput.

---

Step 5: Assemble Full Spec

After all agents complete, assemble the complete spec.md:

1. Initialize with metadata:

# {Spec Name}

**Status:** Draft
**Created:** {YYYY-MM-DD}
**Last Updated:** {YYYY-MM-DD}
**Owner:** @{github-id}

---

2. Append sections in order:

   • Read tmp/overview.md → append
   • Read tmp/out-of-scope.md → append
   • Read tmp/requirements.md → append
   • Read tmp/technical-design.md → append

3. Write complete spec.md to spec folder

---

Step 6: Coherence Check

Before presenting to the user, validate internal consistency.

Launch Coherence Checker

subagent_type: "spec-coherence-checker"
description: "Validate spec consistency"
prompt: "Validate internal consistency of the spec at:
- spec.md: {spec-path}/spec.md

Check that FR references, type names, and scope are consistent across all sections."

Handle Results

If PASS:

• Proceed to user review (Step 7)

If FAIL:

1. Review the specific inconsistencies listed
2. Fix the spec.md sections that are inconsistent
3. Re-run the coherence checker
4. Repeat until PASS (max 2 iterations)

If stuck after 2 iterations: Proceed to Step 7 (Autonomous Validation) which handles Andon escalation. Do not escalate separately here.

---

Step 7: Autonomous Validation (or Human Review)

Autonomous Mode (Default for Sub-Agent Execution)

When running as a sub-agent (dispatched by spec-executor), skip human review if ALL conditions pass:

Auto-Approve Criteria:

• spec-coherence-checker: PASS
• No ⚠️ TBD items remain from spec-research.md
• All interface contracts have traced sources
• Out of Scope items are all classified (no ⚠️ Unassigned)

If all criteria pass → Proceed directly to Step 8 (Generate Checklist)

Human Review Mode (Interactive Execution)

When running interactively (user invoked /spec directly):

1. Show full document - Display the assembled spec.md
2. Collect feedback - User reviews entire document at once
3. Iterate if needed - Make changes based on consolidated feedback
4. Finalize - Once user approves, proceed to checklist generation

Andon Escalation

If autonomous validation fails, ESCALATE - do not proceed:

SPEC BLOCKED

Validation failure: [which check failed]
Details: [specific issue]

Impact: Cannot proceed to implementation without resolution.

Options:
1. Return to research phase to update contracts
2. Clarify with user: [specific question]
3. Proceed with assumption: [state assumption explicitly]

Need decision to proceed.

Escalation Triggers:

• spec-coherence-checker fails 2+ iterations
• Discovered gap in research interface contracts
• ⚠️ TBD items that cannot be resolved from available context
• Scope ambiguity that contracts don't address

---

Step 8: Generate Checklist

After spec approved:

1. Read final spec.md
2. Read spec-research.md Test Plan section
3. Generate checklist.md with:
   • Phase 1.0 tasks from Test Plan
   • Phase 1.1 tasks from Functional Requirements
   • Phase 1.2 review tasks (mandatory - do not omit)

Use checklist-template.md.

Important: Phase 1.2 includes mandatory review agent steps. Ensure these are included in every generated checklist.

---

Step 9: Checklist Validation

Before proceeding to QC, validate checklist completeness.

Launch Checklist Validator

subagent_type: "checklist-completeness-validator"
description: "Validate checklist coverage"
prompt: "Validate checklist completeness at:
- checklist.md: {spec-path}/checklist.md
- spec.md: {spec-path}/spec.md
- spec-research.md: {spec-path}/spec-research.md

Ensure every FR has test and implementation tasks, and Phase 1.2 review section exists."

Handle Results

If PASS:

• Proceed to QC validation (Step 10)

If FAIL:

1. Review the specific gaps listed
2. Add missing tasks to checklist.md
3. Re-run the checklist validator
4. Repeat until PASS (max 2 iterations)

If stuck after 2 iterations: Escalate to user - spec or research may need adjustment.

---

Step 10: QC Validation

Before committing, spawn the spec-qc agent to validate outputs.

Launch QC Agent

subagent_type: "spec-qc"
description: "Validate spec outputs"
prompt: "Validate the spec at:
- spec.md: {spec-path}/spec.md
- spec-research.md: {spec-path}/spec-research.md

Compare spec against research foundation. Run delta checks and report PASS or FAIL."

Handle QC Results

If PASS:

• Proceed to commit (Step 11)

If FAIL:

1. Review the specific deltas listed
2. Fix inconsistencies in spec.md (or escalate if research needs updating)
3. Re-run the spec-qc agent
4. Repeat until PASS (max 2-3 iterations)

If stuck after 2-3 iterations:

• Escalate to user with remaining issues
• User decides: fix manually, proceed with known gaps, or return to research phase

---

Step 11: Cleanup and Commit

Delete tmp/ folder

Remove the temporary drafts folder - it has served its purpose:

rm -rf {spec-path}/tmp

Update FEATURE.md Changelog

1. Read FEATURE.md
2. Add entry to Changelog table:

   | {YYYY-MM-DD} | [{NN}-{spec-name}](specs/{NN}-{spec-name}/spec.md) | {description} |
   

Stage and Commit Spec Artifacts

git add features/{domain}/{feature}/specs/{NN}-{spec-name}/spec.md
git add features/{domain}/{feature}/specs/{NN}-{spec-name}/checklist.md
git add features/{domain}/{feature}/FEATURE.md
git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
spec({NN}-{spec-name}): add spec and checklist

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
EOF
)"

Important: Stage specific files, not git add -A.

---

Step 12: Completion

Confirm with user:

"Spec complete.

Created:
- spec.md: [path] (requirements)
- checklist.md: [path] (tasks for implementation)
- FEATURE.md changelog updated

Next step: Run `implement` skill to build it"

---

Key Principles

• Clarifications upfront - Resolve ambiguities before drafting
• spec-research.md already exists - Created by research skill
• Test plan from contracts - Derive tests from interface definitions
• Parallel for speed - 4 agents draft simultaneously
• Single review for efficiency - User reviews complete document once (interactive mode)
• Checklist enables execution - Clear tasks for implement phase
• Autonomous when possible - Skip human review if QC passes and contracts are clear
• Escalate on exception - Andon pattern for genuine blockers, not minor issues