fs-skia-feedback-capture

name	fs-skia-feedback-capture
description	Capture per-phase fs-skia-ui / Spec Kit feedback (process friction, generalizable-code candidates, severity) into specs/<feature>/feedback/ after each phase.
compatibility	Authoring command skill, shipped only when `dotnet new fs-skia-ui --feedback true`; no product runtime.
metadata	{"author":"fs-skia-ui","source":"specs/058-skills-quality-feedback/contracts/feedback-capture.md"}

fs-skia-feedback-capture

An authoring command skill invoked by the generated project's after_* Spec Kit hooks (only present under --feedback true). On phase completion it surfaces four exact prompts and writes one dated, phase-identified feedback record.

When to use

• Automatically, via the after_specify / after_clarify / after_plan / after_tasks / after_analyze / after_implement hooks wired into .specify/extensions/feedback/.
• Fires only on phase completion — an aborted or failed phase runs no after_* hook and writes nothing (FR-016).

Driven-library API

This is a process/authoring command skill — no backing library. It produces a Markdown record; it calls no shipped .fsi surface.

The four prompts (exact wording, {phase} substituted)

1. "During the {phase} phase, did anything go wrong or cause friction in the fs-skia-ui / Spec Kit process — and what would have helped you?"
2. "Did you write any F# code on a skill topic this phase that could be generalized into the support library? If yes, name the skill family/topic and the candidate helper (and link any external docs/research used)."
3. "What additional or new skills would have been helpful during the {phase} phase? Name the topic and what the missing skill should have covered, or 'none'."
4. "How blocking was the friction — none / minor / major / blocker?"

Runnable example — the record written to specs/<feature>/feedback/<phase>-<date>.md

---
phase: plan
date: 2026-06-03
severity: minor            # none | minor | major | blocker
---

## Process friction
<answer to prompt 1 — what went wrong + what would have helped>

## Generalizable code
<answer to prompt 2 — skill family/topic + candidate helper, or "none">

## Skill gaps
<answer to prompt 3 — additional/new skills that would have helped this phase
 (topic + what the missing skill should cover), or "none">

## Research links
<official-docs-first then community links, when created after a hard problem;
 offline: "research blocked — <why>">

One record per phase (FR-014). Severity is mandatory (FR-015). A record naming generalizable code MUST capture the skill family/topic + candidate helper so it can be triaged into FS.Skia.UI.SkillSupport (FR-015 → US2).

Persistent problems

When a problem outlasts reasonable in-repo attempts, extensive external research is mandatory — consult official online docs first (the F#/.NET docs and the driven library's own documentation/API reference), then community sources (forums, Reddit, Q&A sites, issue trackers and changelogs). Record the findings and resolving links in the feature's specs/<feature>/feedback/ folder and, for durable lessons, in this skill's Sources line. Offline, the mandate degrades to recording "research blocked — " rather than hard-failing the phase.

Related

[[fs-skia-project]], [[fsharp-build-orchestration]]

Sources / links

• Spec Kit hooks & extensions model: https://github.com/github/spec-kit
• F# docs: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/fsharp/