interview

---

name: interview argument-hint: [topic | --promote ] description: Structured interview → brainstorm | analysis | spec (with promotion). Triggers: "create a spec" | "interview" | "brainstorm" | "write analysis" | "promote to spec" | "let's brainstorm" | "think through this" | "help me brainstorm" | "let's think this through" | "explore ideas". version: 0.2.0 allowed-tools: Write, Read, Edit, Glob, ToolSearch

Interview

Let: β := Brainstorm | α := Analysis | σ := Spec τ := document type ∈ {β, α, σ} A := artifacts/analyses/ | S := artifacts/specs/ AQ := present choice, wait for user reply

Conduct structured interview → produce one of {β, α, σ}. Supports promoting existing doc to next level.

Step 0 — Check --promote

∃ --promote <path>:

1. Read doc at path.
2. Determine current τ (frontmatter first, content structure fallback):
   • type: brainstorm ∈ frontmatter → β → promote to α.
   • ¬type ∧ lives in A ∧ "Trigger"/"Ideas" structure → treat as β.
   • A path ∧ "Questions Explored"/"Analysis"/"Conclusions" structure → α → promote to σ.
   • Already σ → inform: "Already a spec. Nothing to promote." Stop.
3. Skip to Step 2; limit questions to gaps between current doc and next level. Pre-fill known from source.
4. In promoted doc's Context: **Promoted from:** [source title](relative-path-to-source)

¬--promote → Step 1.

Step 1 — Existing Document Awareness

Glob A, S — match topic by issue#, keywords, or slug.

∃ related docs → AQ:

"Found existing documents: {list with paths}. How to proceed?"

• Build on existing — use as context, extend
• Promote to next level — α → σ or β → α
• Start fresh — ignore, begin new interview

¬related → Step 2.

Step 2 — Determine Document Type

∃ --promote → skip (already determined). Else AQ:

τ	Purpose	Output Path
β	Divergent exploration, early-stage ideas	artifacts/analyses/{slug}.md
α	Structured investigation of topic/problem	artifacts/analyses/{slug}.md
σ	Technical specification for implementation	artifacts/specs/{issue}-{slug}.md

Step 3 — Structured Interview

AQ per phase. Group 2–4 questions/call. Skip questions obvious from context, arguments, or source doc.

Phase 1 — Context & Framing (2–3 questions)

• What triggered this? What is the problem or opportunity?
• What exists today? What has been tried?

α-specific — also capture:

• Source material: verbatim request/quote/ticket (ground truth)
• Outcome: success ¬prescribing solution
• Appetite: time budget (fixed time, variable scope)

Phase 2 — Scope (2–3 questions)

• Who are the users? What are their workflows?
• What is explicitly out of scope?
• Constraints (technical, time, dependencies)?

Phase 3 — Depth (2–4 questions, adapt to τ)

• Edge cases and failure modes?
• Trade-offs being considered?
• Integration with existing systems?
• What does success look like?

Shape Up terminology: shape = mutually exclusive arch approach (name, trade-offs, rough scope). breadboard = affordance tables (UI elements → handlers → data). slices = demo-able vertical increments.

α-specific depth:

• Architecture shapes: 2–3 mutually exclusive approaches; ∀ shape: name, description, trade-offs, scope.
• Constraint alignment: which constraints eliminate which approach?

σ-specific depth — probe ambiguity via 9-category taxonomy:

Category	Example probe
Functional Scope	"What exactly happens when X?"
Domain & Data Model	"What entities/relationships are involved?"
UX	"What does the user see/do at each step?"
Non-Functional	"Performance/scale/reliability requirements?"
Integrations	"What external systems does this touch?"
Edge Cases	"What happens when X fails or is missing?"
Constraints	"What technical/time/budget limits apply?"
Terminology	"Terms that could mean different things?"
Completion Signals	"How do we know this is done?"

∀ ambiguity: rank by Impact × Uncertainty (H/M/L). H×H → follow-up question. Unresolved → [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: description] (max 3–5/spec). Must resolve before /plan.

Depth by τ: β = Phase 1 + divergent (lighter) | α = Phases 1–3 thorough | σ = all phases, rigorous on edge cases + criteria.

Phase 4 — Validation (1 question, always last)

"My understanding before generating:

• Type: {τ}
• Title: {proposed title}
• Key points: {bulleted summary}

Anything to correct or add?"

Step 4 — Generate Document

Write using appropriate template. Rules:

• .md extension with YAML frontmatter (title, description).
• Kebab-case slugs.
• σ prefix: artifacts/specs/{issue}-{slug}-spec.md
• α/β: artifacts/analyses/{slug}-analysis.md (prefix with issue# if ∃).
• β adds type: brainstorm to frontmatter.

---

Document Templates

Use templates from references/templates.md — Brainstorm, Analysis, Spec.

$ARGUMENTS