| name | using-loom-spec |
| description | Use when starting spec work and unsure which loom-spec skill applies. Family entry router — routes to spec-expansion (draft/expand a spec from a seed) or completeness-critic (critique an existing draft for omissions).
|
| version | 0.1.0 |
using-loom-spec
If you are a subagent already dispatched with an explicit role prompt, **do not** re-route through this skill. Follow the prompt you were dispatched with directly. This router is for the parent orchestrator only.
**You have loom-spec.** This skill does not draft or critique a spec itself —
it is the thin entry that decides which of loom-spec's two member skills the
work needs, after checking whether spec work is even the right station yet.
Brief before you ask a complex spec fork. Before you ask the user a spec fork this complex — ≥3 trade-offs, ≥2 implementation paths, or architectural blast radius — run dev-workflow:brief-before-asking first instead of improvising the question.
§Intake
All user-facing narration in this router — briefs, critique summaries,
decision asks — follows loom-pipeline/hooks/family-relay.md §Family relay discipline
(pointer, never copy).
Step 1 — 前站檢查 (upstream check). Check the target repo against the
loom family's on-ramp criteria table (loom-pipeline/hooks/family-reception.md
— the reception SSOT; reference it, don't copy its rows here). Two rows are
most relevant to spec work: if the work touches a user-facing surface and no
DESIGN.md/ui-flows.md exists yet, recommend using-loom-interface-design
first — specifying before the surface is designed re-derives it and drifts.
If no docs/loom/PRINCIPLES.md exists and the work is product-shaped (a new
product/feature idea, not an increment), recommend using-loom-product-principles
first. Recommend once, record the user's choice, then proceed either way
— the negative guard still applies (bug fix / refactor / test-covered
increment → do not interrupt).
Step 2 — 對站檢查 (peer check). If the ask isn't spec work at all — it's
a UI/UX design ask, a product-constitution ask, or an implementation/code
ask — redirect to the matching family entry (using-loom-interface-design,
using-loom-product-principles, using-loom-code) rather than forcing it
through loom-spec.
Step 3 — family routing (disambiguation). Once the ask is confirmed spec
work, route between loom-spec's two members by the specific verb — this
distinction is load-bearing, not cosmetic:
- draft/expand a spec from a seed — a few lines of feature intent, or a
ui-flows.md, that needs fan-out into objects/states/paths/edge cases →
spec-expansion.
- critique/audit an EXISTING draft for omissions — a spec-expansion
output already exists and needs a completeness pass before VERIFY →
completeness-critic.
This closes the #456-documented adjacent mis-route: a critique-an-existing-
spec ask getting sent to spec-expansion (which would silently re-draft
instead of auditing) instead of completeness-critic. When in doubt, ask
"does a draft already exist to critique, or am I starting from a seed?" — the
answer picks the member.
Family
spec-expansion — GENERATE-layer writer. Fans a sparse seed out into a
high-recall spec draft (OpenSpec change-folder shape).completeness-critic — GENERATE-layer critic. Adversarially hunts
omissions in an existing spec-expansion draft via a fresh-context lens
panel; never touches code.
Both stop at GENERATE — loom-code:writing-plans reads the emitted
#### Scenario: criteria downstream; that is the one-directional spec→code
handoff, not this router's job.
How to access skills
| Harness | Mechanism |
|---|
| Claude Code | Use the Skill tool, e.g. Skill(skill: "spec-expansion"). |
| Codex CLI | Use the skill tool (Codex shape). |
If the user types /skill-name, that is an explicit invocation — load it via
the Skill tool. Do not guess names that are not listed above.
What this router does NOT do
- Does not draft a spec itself — that is
spec-expansion.
- Does not critique a spec itself — that is
completeness-critic.
- Does not auto-invoke either member — the harness invokes them when the
user's next message + this routing decision match.
