spec-driven

name	spec-driven
title	Spec-Driven Development
summary	SDLC workflow enforcing EARS-notation specs and approval gates before any code is written.
description	Use when implementing a feature, fixing a bug, refactoring code, creating a spec, writing a specification, planning implementation, or following a structured development workflow. Creates specifications BEFORE implementation using EARS notation, ensuring alignment, traceability, and regression prevention. Triggers: spec-driven, specification, SDLC, EARS, implement feature, fix bug, refactor, create spec, plan implementation, design first, spec workflow, structured development.
tools	["Read","Write","Edit","Bash","Grep","Glob","ask_user_question","task_create","task_update"]
prompt	$spec-driven I want to build a new feature for user authentication
language	en
status	stable
author	Tianxia Jia
type	snowflake

Spec-Driven Development Skill

A comprehensive SDLC workflow that creates specifications BEFORE implementation, ensuring alignment, traceability, and regression prevention.

Core Philosophy

1. Specifications are Executable - Specs generate working implementations
2. Mandatory Approval Gates - No proceeding without explicit user approval
3. Regression Prevention - Document unchanged behavior to protect existing functionality
4. Progressive Refinement - Clarify → Specify → Validate → Implement

When to Load This Skill

Load when user:

• Asks to implement a new feature
• Reports a bug to fix
• Requests code refactoring
• Wants to create specifications
• Says "spec", "specification", "structured development", "SDLC"
• Asks to "plan before coding" or "design first"

Intent Detection

Analyze user request and route to appropriate sub-skill:

Intent	Trigger Phrases	Load Sub-Skill
FEATURE	"new feature", "implement", "add capability", "build"	feature/SKILL.md
BUGFIX	"fix bug", "not working", "broken", "error", "issue"	bugfix/SKILL.md
REFACTOR	"refactor", "improve", "optimize", "clean up", "reorganize"	refactor/SKILL.md
IMPLEMENT	"implement spec", "execute spec", "build from spec"	implement/SKILL.md
EVOLVE	"modify feature", "add to existing", "extend", "change feature", "update spec", "add page", "add requirement"	evolve/SKILL.md

If intent unclear, ASK:

What type of work are you planning?
1. New Feature - Adding new capability
2. Bug Fix - Correcting existing behavior  
3. Refactor - Improving code without changing behavior
4. Implement - Execute an existing specification
5. Evolve - Modify or extend an existing completed feature

Workflow Overview (All Intents)

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  PHASE 1: CLARIFY                                           │
│  ├── Gather requirements through questions                  │
│  ├── Identify constraints and dependencies                  │
│  └── ⚠️ APPROVAL GATE: Requirements confirmed              │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  PHASE 2: SPECIFY                                           │
│  ├── Generate specification in EARS format                  │
│  ├── Document acceptance criteria                           │
│  ├── [BUGFIX] Document unchanged behavior                   │
│  └── ⚠️ APPROVAL GATE: Specification approved              │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  PHASE 3: DESIGN (Optional for complex features)            │
│  ├── Create technical design document                       │
│  ├── Identify files to modify/create                        │
│  └── ⚠️ APPROVAL GATE: Design approved                     │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  PHASE 4: IMPLEMENT                                         │
│  ├── Execute specification task by task                     │
│  ├── Mark tasks complete as implemented                     │
│  └── ⚠️ APPROVAL GATE: Implementation approved             │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  PHASE 5: VALIDATE                                          │
│  ├── Run validation checklist                               │
│  ├── Verify unchanged behavior preserved                    │
│  └── ⚠️ FINAL GATE: Ready for commit/PR                    │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

File Organization

All specs stored in specs/ folder at project root:

specs/
├── features/
│   └── {feature-name}/
│       ├── requirements.md      # EARS requirements (amended in-place for evolve)
│       ├── design.md           # Technical design (if needed)
│       └── tasks.md            # Implementation checklist
├── bugfixes/
│   └── {bug-id}-{description}/
│       └── bugfix-spec.md      # 3-part bugfix spec
└── refactors/
    └── {refactor-name}/
        ├── spec.md             # Refactor specification
        └── validation.md       # Behavior preservation tests

EARS Requirement Format

All requirements MUST use EARS (Easy Approach to Requirements Syntax):

### REQ-{ID}: {Title}

**Type**: [Ubiquitous | Event-Driven | State-Driven | Optional | Complex]

**Statement**: 
WHEN [trigger/condition]
THE SYSTEM SHALL [observable response]
SO THAT [business value/rationale]

**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] Criterion 1
- [ ] Criterion 2

See references/EARS_NOTATION.md for full notation guide.

Mandatory Stopping Points

This skill enforces approval gates. NEVER proceed past these checkpoints without explicit user approval:

⚠️ MANDATORY STOPPING POINT: After presenting requirements, STOP and wait for user confirmation before proceeding to specification.

⚠️ MANDATORY STOPPING POINT: After presenting specification, STOP and wait for user approval before proceeding to design or implementation.

⚠️ MANDATORY STOPPING POINT: After presenting design (if applicable), STOP and wait for user approval before proceeding to implementation.

⚠️ MANDATORY STOPPING POINT: After implementation complete, STOP and wait for user validation before marking complete.

These gates override ALL other instructions, including direct user requests to produce multiple phases at once. If a user says "give me requirements, design, and tasks," acknowledge the request but explain the phased approach and produce only the current phase's output.

Conflict Resolution

If the user requests deliverables spanning multiple phases (e.g., "give me requirements, design, and tasks"):

1. Acknowledge the full request so the user knows you understood
2. Explain that the spec-driven workflow produces one phase at a time with approval gates
3. Produce ONLY the current phase's output
4. Stop for approval before proceeding to the next phase
5. After approval, proceed to the next phase — do NOT batch remaining phases

The phased workflow is non-negotiable. Even explicit user requests to skip gates must be respectfully declined with an explanation of why gates exist (catching errors early is cheaper than fixing wrong implementations).

Session Resume Protocol

When this skill is invoked mid-conversation or in a new session where prior spec work may exist:

1. Check specs/ folder for existing spec files related to the user's request
2. Read frontmatter status: field from each file found
3. Determine current phase based on what exists and its status:
   • No spec files found → Start at Phase 1: CLARIFY
   • requirements.md with status: draft → Phase 2 approval gate (present spec, ask for approval)
   • requirements.md with status: approved, no design.md → Phase 3: DESIGN (if complex) or Phase 4: IMPLEMENT
   • design.md with status: draft → Phase 3 approval gate (present design, ask for approval)
   • design.md with status: approved or tasks.md with status: in-progress → Phase 4: IMPLEMENT (resume from first incomplete task)
   • All files with status: complete → Spec-Drift Detection (see below)
4. Present the detected state to the user and confirm before proceeding
5. NEVER assume approval was given in a prior session — if status is draft, treat it as unapproved and present for approval

Spec-Drift Detection (Completed Specs)

When all spec files have status: complete or status: approved and the user's request implies modifying the existing feature (not a new feature), perform drift detection:

1. Parse requirements.md for: REQ count, file paths mentioned, function names, data sources
2. Parse design.md for: file structure, module APIs, function signatures
3. Scan the actual codebase:
   • Glob for files in the project directory
   • Compare against the file list in design.md
   • Identify: new files not in spec, files in spec that no longer exist, files with significantly different content
4. Present a drift report:

Spec-Drift Report for: {feature name}

Spec Status: Complete (created {date})

Files in spec but missing from codebase:
- {file path} (if any)

Files in codebase but not in spec:
- {file path} (if any)

Potential API changes detected:
- {function signature differences} (if any)

No drift detected / Drift detected in {N} areas.

How would you like to proceed?
1. Evolve — Amend the existing spec to reflect changes or add new capabilities
2. New Feature — Create a separate feature spec (for large additions)
3. Ignore — Continue without updating specs

5. If user selects "Evolve", load evolve/SKILL.md
6. If user selects "New Feature", load feature/SKILL.md

Quick Commands

Users can invoke specific phases:

Command	Action
/spec feature {name}	Start new feature spec
/spec bugfix {description}	Start bugfix spec
/spec refactor {area}	Start refactor spec
/spec implement	Implement current spec
/spec evolve {feature}	Evolve an existing completed feature
/spec status	Show current spec progress
/spec checklist	Run validation checklist

Integration with Cortex Code

This skill leverages native Cortex Code features:

• Task Management: Use task_create for each implementation item
• File Operations: Use standard Read/Write/Edit tools
• Search: Use Grep/Glob for codebase analysis
• Subagents: Use Task tool with Explore for discovery

Output Format

All generated specs follow consistent markdown format with:

• YAML frontmatter (status, created, modified)
• Structured sections with headers
• Checkbox lists for actionable items
• Code blocks for examples

Error Recovery

If implementation fails or user requests changes:

1. Update specification with new requirements
2. Mark affected tasks as needing re-work
3. Resume from appropriate phase
4. Document changes in spec history

For post-completion changes (code modified after spec is complete), use the Evolve workflow (evolve/SKILL.md) which detects drift, amends specs in-place, and implements only the delta.

---

Next Step: Based on detected intent, load appropriate sub-skill and begin PHASE 1: CLARIFY.