القائمة
Review an agent-only discussion requirement contract before it becomes ready or is consumed downstream.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Advanced post-Review human acceptance workflow. Use after fresh approved Review closeout to restore a contextless human's understanding, guide one real product step at a time, and persist an explicit pass, fail, or blocked verdict.
Read-only cross-artifact consistency analysis for advanced coding models. Use when tasks exist and the specification, plan, and task boundaries need an independent gate before or during execution.
Existing-spec repair workflow for advanced coding models. Use when a specification package has planning-critical ambiguity, weak acceptance, contradictions, or new constraints that should be absorbed without recreating the feature.
Focused pre-plan feasibility research for advanced coding models. Use when a planning-ready specification still lacks a credible implementation chain, external evidence, or a disposable proof.
Lean design-system workflow for advanced coding models. Use for a new product UI, redesign, rebrand, shared visual language, or an audit/update of the root DESIGN.md contract.
Resumable product and technical discussion for advanced coding models. Use when a rough idea needs durable decisions and options before formal specification.
| name | spec-kit-discussion-handoff-review |
| description | Review an agent-only discussion requirement contract before it becomes ready or is consumed downstream. |
Use when sp-discussion asks for final review, a user requests changes, or sp-specify/sp-quick reports contract integrity failure.
Review .specify/discussions/<slug>/handoff-to-specify.json. It is the only handoff authority. Do not require, generate, or compare a Markdown companion.
Human-facing explanation belongs in the visible reply; the contract remains schema-first and agent-only.
Read supporting discussion-state.md, requirements.md, technical-options.md, project-context.md, or open-questions.md only when a named source-evidence ref is stale, missing, contradictory, or required to repair a specific field. Do not sweep them by default.
MP-*, CA-###, dependencies, and stop/reopen conditions.Return one structured verdict:
approve: no semantic or integrity blocker;request-changes: name exact JSON refs and required corrections;blocked: name cause, owner, safe retry, and stop condition.For the visible human review, explain the decision being requested, scope and exclusions, readiness checks, protected review criteria, carry-forward coverage, blocking issues, required changes, and next action. The agent chooses the visible headings and layout; no fixed review card is required.
Deterministic field/schema/digest failures are repaired through {{specify-subcmd:specify-runtime discussion validate-handoff}} and sp-discussion. Review judgment must not silently patch upstream truth.
After changes, recompute the digest and require confirmation of the current revision. Do not treat confirmation of an older digest as approval.
Keep a field only when omitting it can change downstream action, lose a requirement or obligation, force rediscovery, weaken validation, or prevent safe recovery. Remove presentation prose, duplicated history, and fields irrelevant to eligible consumers.