Skip to main content
moai-workflow-spec SPEC workflow orchestration with EARS format requirements, acceptance criteria, and Plan-Run-Sync integration for MoAI-ADK development methodology. Use when creating SPEC documents, writing EARS requirements, defining acceptance criteria, planning features, or orchestrating the /moai plan phase. Do NOT use for implementation (use moai-workflow-ddd instead) or documentation generation (use moai-workflow-project instead).
Ir a la instalación Skills Marketplace Descubre y explora habilidades de IA creadas por la comunidad.
Instalar con Codex o Claude Copia este prompt, pégalo en Codex, Claude u otro asistente, y deja que revise la página de la skill y la instale por ti.
Mostrar detalles del prompt Un comando directo omite el prompt de revisión. Revisa el origen antes de ejecutarlo.
npx skills add https://github.com/modu-ai/cc-plugins --skill moai-workflow-specEl comando permanece en una sola línea. Desplázate horizontalmente para revisarlo antes de copiarlo.
¿Prefieres una copia local? Descarga los archivos que SkillsMP tiene disponibles ahora.
Descargar Zip Descargando... Más de este repositorio Design tool integration specialist covering Figma MCP, Pencil renderer, and Pencil-to-code export. Use when fetching design context from Figma, rendering Pencil DNA codes to .pen frames, exporting .pen designs to React/Tailwind code, or choosing design-to-code workflows. Supports design fetching (Figma), visual rendering (Pencil MCP), and code generation (React/Tailwind).
Documentation generation patterns for technical specs, API docs, user guides, and knowledge bases using real tools like Sphinx, MkDocs, TypeDoc, and Nextra. Use when creating docs from code, building doc sites, or automating documentation workflows.
Backend development specialist covering API design, database integration, microservices architecture, and modern backend patterns. Use when user asks about API design, REST or GraphQL endpoints, server implementation, authentication, authorization, middleware, or backend service architecture. Do NOT use for database-specific schema design or query optimization (use moai-domain-database instead) or frontend implementation (use moai-domain-frontend instead).
Explorador de archivos
4 archivos Ocupaciones relacionadas SOC
Basado en la clasificación ocupacional SOC
name moai-workflow-spec description SPEC workflow orchestration with EARS format requirements, acceptance criteria, and Plan-Run-Sync integration for MoAI-ADK development methodology. Use when creating SPEC documents, writing EARS requirements, defining acceptance criteria, planning features, or orchestrating the /moai plan phase. Do NOT use for implementation (use moai-workflow-ddd instead) or documentation generation (use moai-workflow-project instead).
license Apache-2.0 compatibility Designed for Claude Code allowed-tools Read Write Edit Bash(git:*) Bash(ls:*) Bash(wc:*) Bash(mkdir:*) Grep Glob mcp__context7__resolve-library-id mcp__context7__get-library-docs user-invocable false metadata {"version":"1.2.0","category":"workflow","status":"active","updated":"2026-01-08","modularized":"true","tags":"workflow, spec, ears, requirements, moai-adk, planning","author":"MoAI-ADK Team","context":"fork","agent":"Plan"} progressive_disclosure {"enabled":true,"level1_tokens":100,"level2_tokens":5000} triggers {"keywords":["SPEC","requirement","EARS","acceptance criteria","user story","planning","specification","requirements gathering"],"phases":["plan"],"agents":["manager-spec","manager-strategy","Plan"]}
SPEC Workflow Management
Quick Reference (30 seconds)
SPEC Workflow Orchestration - Comprehensive specification management using EARS format for systematic requirement definition and Plan-Run-Sync workflow integration.
Core Capabilities:
EARS Format Specifications: Five requirement patterns for clarity
Requirement Clarification: Four-step systematic process
SPEC Document Templates: Standardized structure for consistency
Plan-Run-Sync Integration: Seamless workflow connection
Parallel Development: Git Worktree-based SPEC isolation
Quality Gates: TRUST 5 framework validation
EARS Five Patterns:
Ubiquitous: The system shall always perform action - Always active
Event-Driven: WHEN event occurs THEN action executes - Trigger-response
State-Driven: IF condition is true THEN action executes - Conditional behavior
Unwanted: The system shall not perform action - Prohibition
Optional: Where possible, provide feature - Nice-to-have
When to Use:
Feature planning and requirement definition
SPEC document creation and maintenance
Parallel feature development coordination
Quality assurance and validation planning
Quick Commands:
Create new SPEC: /moai:1-plan "user authentication system"
Create parallel SPECs with Worktrees: /moai:1-plan "login feature" "signup feature" --worktree
Create SPEC with new branch: /moai:1-plan "payment processing" --branch
Update existing SPEC: /moai:1-plan SPEC-001 "add OAuth support"
Implementation Guide (5 minutes)
Core Concepts
SPEC-First Development Philosophy:
EARS format ensures unambiguous requirements
Requirement clarification prevents scope creep
Systematic validation through test scenarios
Integration with DDD workflow for implementation
Quality gates enforce completion criteria
Constitution reference ensures project-wide consistency
Constitution Reference (SDD 2025 Standard)
Constitution defines the project DNA that all SPECs must respect. Before creating any SPEC, verify alignment with project constitution defined in .moai/project/tech.md.
Constitution Components:
Technology Stack: Required versions and frameworks
Naming Conventions: Variable, function, and file naming standards
Forbidden Libraries: Libraries explicitly prohibited with alternatives
Architectural Patterns: Layering rules and dependency directions
Security Standards: Authentication patterns and encryption requirements
Logging Standards: Log format and structured logging requirements Constitution Verification:
All SPEC technology choices must align with Constitution stack versions
No SPEC may introduce forbidden libraries or patterns
SPEC must follow naming conventions defined in Constitution
SPEC must respect architectural boundaries and layering
WHY: Constitution prevents architectural drift and ensures maintainability
IMPACT: SPECs aligned with Constitution reduce integration conflicts significantly
SPEC Workflow Stages Stage 1 - User Input Analysis: Parse natural language feature description
Stage 2 - Requirement Clarification: Four-step systematic process
Stage 3 - EARS Pattern Application: Structure requirements using five patterns
Stage 4 - Success Criteria Definition: Establish completion metrics
Stage 5 - Test Scenario Generation: Create verification test cases
Stage 6 - SPEC Document Generation: Produce standardized markdown output
EARS Format Deep Dive Ubiquitous Requirements - Always Active:
Use case: System-wide quality attributes
Examples: Logging, input validation, error handling
Test strategy: Include in all feature test suites as common verification
Event-Driven Requirements - Trigger-Response:
Use case: User interactions and inter-system communication
Examples: Button clicks, file uploads, payment completions
Test strategy: Event simulation with expected response verification
State-Driven Requirements - Conditional Behavior:
Use case: Access control, state machines, conditional business logic
Examples: Account status checks, inventory verification, permission checks
Test strategy: State setup with conditional behavior verification
Unwanted Requirements - Prohibited Actions:
Use case: Security vulnerabilities, data integrity protection
Examples: No plaintext passwords, no unauthorized access, no PII in logs
Test strategy: Negative test cases with prohibited behavior verification
Optional Requirements - Enhancement Features:
Use case: MVP scope definition, feature prioritization
Examples: OAuth login, dark mode, offline mode
Test strategy: Conditional test execution based on implementation status
Requirement Clarification Process Step 0 - Assumption Analysis (Philosopher Framework):
Before defining scope, surface and validate underlying assumptions using AskUserQuestion.
Technical Assumptions: Technology capabilities, API availability, performance characteristics
Business Assumptions: User behavior, market requirements, timeline feasibility
Team Assumptions: Skill availability, resource allocation, knowledge gaps
Integration Assumptions: Third-party service reliability, compatibility expectations
Assumption Documentation:
Assumption Statement: Clear description of what is assumed
Confidence Level: High, Medium, or Low based on evidence
Evidence Basis: What supports this assumption
Risk if Wrong: Consequence if assumption proves false
Validation Method: How to verify before committing significant effort
Step 0.5 - Root Cause Analysis:
For feature requests or problem-driven SPECs, apply Five Whys:
Surface Problem: What is the user observing or requesting?
First Why: What immediate need drives this request?
Second Why: What underlying problem creates that need?
Third Why: What systemic factor contributes?
Root Cause: What fundamental issue must the solution adddess?
Step 1 - Scope Definition:
Identify supported authentication methods
Define validation rules and constraints
Determine failure handling strategy
Establish session management approach
Step 2 - Constraint Extraction:
Performance Requirements: Response time targets
Security Requirements: OWASP compliance, encryption standards
Compatibility Requirements: Supported browsers and devices
Scalability Requirements: Concurrent user targets
Step 3 - Success Criteria Definition:
Test Coverage: Minimum percentage target
Response Time: Percentile targets (P50, P95, P99)
Functional Completion: All normal scenarios pass verification
Quality Gates: Zero linter warnings, zero security vulnerabilities
Step 4 - Test Scenario Creation:
Normal Cases: Valid inputs with expected outputs
Error Cases: Invalid inputs with error handling
Edge Cases: Boundary conditions and corner cases
Security Cases: Injection attacks, privilege escalation attempts
Plan-Run-Sync Workflow Integration PLAN Phase (/moai:1-plan):
manager-spec agent analyzes user input
EARS format requirements generation
Requirement clarification with user interaction
SPEC document creation in .moai/specs/ directory
Git branch creation (optional --branch flag)
Git Worktree setup (optional --worktree flag)
manager-ddd agent loads SPEC document
ANALYZE-PRESERVE-IMPROVE DDD cycle execution
moai-workflow-testing skill reference for test patterns
Domain Expert agent delegation (expert-backend, expert-frontend, etc.)
Quality validation through manager-quality agent
SYNC Phase (/moai:3-sync):
manager-docs agent synchronizes documentation
API documentation generation from SPEC
README and architecture document updates
CHANGELOG entry creation
Version control commit with SPEC reference
Parallel Development with Git Worktree
Independent working directories for multiple branches
Each SPEC gets isolated development environment
No branch switching needed for parallel work
Reduced merge conflicts through feature isolation
Command /moai:1-plan "login feature" "signup feature" --worktree creates multiple SPECs
Result creates project-worktrees directory with SPEC-specific subdirectories
Parallel Development: Multiple features developed simultaneously
Team Collaboration: Clear ownership boundaries per SPEC
Dependency Isolation: Different library versions per feature
Risk Reduction: Unstable code does not affect other features
Advanced Implementation (10+ minutes) For advanced patterns including SPEC templates, validation automation, and workflow optimization, see:
Resources
SPEC File Organization Directory Structure (Standard 3-File Format):
.moai/specs/SPEC-{ID}/: SPEC document directory containing 3 required files
spec.md: EARS format specification (Environment, Assumptions, Requirements, Specifications)
plan.md: Implementation plan, milestones, technical approach
acceptance.md: Detailed acceptance criteria, test scenarios (Given-When-Then format)
.moai/memory/: Session state files (last-session-state.json)
.moai/docs/: Generated documentation (api-documentation.md)
[HARD] Required File Set:
Every SPEC directory MUST contain all 3 files (spec.md, plan.md, acceptance.md)
WHY: Complete SPEC structure ensures traceability, implementation guidance, and quality validation
IMPACT: Missing files create incomplete requirements and prevent proper workflow execution
SPEC Metadata Schema
SPEC ID: Sequential number (SPEC-001, SPEC-002, etc.)
Title: Feature name in English
Created: ISO 8601 timestamp
Status: Planned, In Progress, Completed, Blocked
Priority: High, Medium, Low
Assigned: Agent responsible for implementation
Related SPECs: Dependencies and related features
Epic: Parent feature group
Estimated Effort: Time estimate in hours or story points
Labels: Tags for categorization
SPEC Lifecycle Management (SDD 2025 Standard)
Description: SPEC written before implementation, discarded after completion
Use Case: One-time features, prototypes, experiments
Maintenance Policy: No maintenance required after implementation
Description: SPEC maintained alongside implementation for evolution
Use Case: Core features, API contracts, integration points
Maintenance Policy: Quarterly review, update when implementation changes
Level 3 - spec-as-source:
Description: SPEC is the single source of truth; only SPEC is edited by humans
Use Case: Critical systems, regulated environments, code generation workflows
Maintenance Policy: SPEC changes trigger implementation regeneration
Lifecycle Transition Rules:
spec-first to spec-anchored: When feature becomes production-critical
spec-anchored to spec-as-source: When compliance or regeneration workflow required
Downgrade allowed but requires explicit justification in SPEC history
Quality Metrics
Requirement Clarity: All EARS patterns used appropriately
Test Coverage: All requirements have corresponding test scenarios
Constraint Completeness: Technical and business constraints defined
Success Criteria Measurability: Quantifiable completion metrics
All EARS requirements testable
No ambiguous language (should, might, usually)
All error cases documented
Performance targets quantified
Security requirements OWASP-compliant
Works Well With
moai-foundation-core: SPEC-First DDD methodology and TRUST 5 framework
moai-workflow-testing: DDD implementation and test automation
moai-workflow-project: Project initialization and configuration
moai-workflow-worktree: Git Worktree management for parallel development
manager-spec: SPEC creation and requirement analysis agent
manager-ddd: DDD implementation based on SPEC requirements
manager-quality: TRUST 5 quality validation and gate enforcement
Integration Examples
Step 1 PLAN: /moai:1-plan "user authentication system"
Step 2 RUN: /moai:2-run SPEC-001
Step 3 SYNC: /moai:3-sync SPEC-001
Create multiple SPECs: /moai:1-plan "backend API" "frontend UI" "database schema" --worktree
Session 1: /moai:2-run SPEC-001 (backend API)
Session 2: /moai:2-run SPEC-002 (frontend UI)
Session 3: /moai:2-run SPEC-003 (database schema)
Token Management
PLAN phase uses approximately 30% of session tokens
RUN phase uses approximately 60% of session tokens
SYNC phase uses approximately 10% of session tokens
SPEC document persists in .moai/specs/ directory
Session memory in .moai/memory/ for cross-session context
Minimal context transfer through SPEC ID reference
Agent delegation reduces token overhead
SPEC Scope and Classification (NEW)
What Belongs in .moai/specs/ The .moai/specs/ directory is EXCLUSIVELY for SPEC documents that define features to be implemented.
Feature requirements in EARS format
Implementation plans with milestones
Acceptance criteria with Given/When/Then scenarios
Technical specifications for new functionality
User stories with clear deliverables
Forward-looking: Describes what WILL be built
Actionable: Contains implementation guidance
Testable: Includes acceptance criteria
Structured: Uses EARS format patterns
What Does NOT Belong in .moai/specs/ Document Type Why Not SPEC Correct Location Security Audit Analyzes existing code .moai/reports/security-audit-{DATE}/Performance Report Documents current metrics .moai/reports/performance-{DATE}/Dependency Analysis Reviews existing dependencies .moai/reports/dependency-review-{DATE}/Architecture Overview Documents current state .moai/docs/architecture.mdAPI Reference Documents existing APIs .moai/docs/api-reference.mdMeeting Notes Records decisions made .moai/reports/meeting-{DATE}/Retrospective Analyzes past work .moai/reports/retro-{DATE}/
Exclusion Rules [HARD] Report vs SPEC Distinction:
Reports analyze what EXISTS → .moai/reports/
SPECs define what will be BUILT → .moai/specs/
[HARD] Documentation vs SPEC Distinction:
Documentation explains HOW TO USE → .moai/docs/
SPECs define WHAT TO BUILD → .moai/specs/
Migration Guide for Legacy Files
Scenario 1: Flat SPEC File → Directory Conversion Problem: .moai/specs/SPEC-AUTH-001.md exists as single file
Create directory: mkdir -p .moai/specs/SPEC-AUTH-001/
Move content: mv .moai/specs/SPEC-AUTH-001.md .moai/specs/SPEC-AUTH-001/spec.md
Create missing files:
Extract implementation plan → plan.md
Extract acceptance criteria → acceptance.md
Verify structure: All 3 files present
Commit: git add . && git commit -m "refactor(spec): Convert SPEC-AUTH-001 to directory structure"
find .moai/specs -maxdepth 1 -name "SPEC-*.md" -type f
Scenario 2: Unnumbered SPEC ID → Number Assignment Problem: SPEC-REDESIGN or SPEC-SDK-INTEGRATION without number
Find next available number:
ls -d .moai/specs/SPEC-*-[0-9][0-9][0-9] 2>/dev/null | sort -t- -k3 -n | tail -1
Assign number: SPEC-REDESIGN → SPEC-REDESIGN-001
Rename directory:
mv .moai/specs/SPEC-REDESIGN .moai/specs/SPEC-REDESIGN-001
Update internal references in spec.md frontmatter
Commit: git commit -m "refactor(spec): Assign number to SPEC-REDESIGN → SPEC-REDESIGN-001"
Scenario 3: Report in SPEC Directory → Separation Problem: Analysis/audit document in .moai/specs/
Identify document type from content
Create reports directory:
mkdir -p .moai/reports/security-audit-2025-01/
Move content:
mv .moai/specs/SPEC-SECURITY-AUDIT/* .moai/reports/security-audit-2025-01/
rmdir .moai/specs/SPEC-SECURITY-AUDIT
Rename main file to report.md if needed
Commit: git commit -m "refactor: Move security audit from specs to reports"
Scenario 4: Duplicate SPEC ID → Resolution Problem: Two directories with same SPEC ID
Compare creation dates:
ls -la .moai/specs/ | grep SPEC-AUTH-001
Determine which is canonical (usually older one)
Renumber newer one to next available:
mv .moai/specs/SPEC-AUTH-001-duplicate .moai/specs/SPEC-AUTH-002
Update internal references
Commit: git commit -m "fix(spec): Resolve duplicate SPEC-AUTH-001 → SPEC-AUTH-002"
Validation Script Run this script to identify SPEC organization issues:
#!/bin/bash
echo "=== SPEC Organization Check ==="
echo -e "\n[Check 1] Flat SPEC files (should be empty):"
find .moai/specs -maxdepth 1 -name "SPEC-*.md" -type f
echo -e "\n[Check 2] SPEC directories missing required files:"
for dir in .moai/specs/SPEC-*/; do
if [ -d "$dir " ]; then
missing=""
[ ! -f "${dir} spec.md" ] && missing="${missing} spec.md "
[ ! -f "${dir} plan.md" ] && missing="${missing} plan.md "
[ ! -f "${dir} acceptance.md" ] && missing="${missing} acceptance.md "
[ -n "$missing " ] && echo "$dir : Missing $missing "
fi
done
echo -e "\n[Check 3] SPECs without proper numbering:"
ls -d .moai/specs/SPEC-*/ 2>/dev/null | grep -v -E 'SPEC-[A-Z]+-[0-9]{3}'
echo -e "\n[Check 4] Potential reports in specs (check manually):"
grep -l -r "findings\|recommendations\|audit\|analysis" .moai/specs/*/spec.md 2>/dev/null
echo -e "\n=== Check Complete ==="
Version: 1.3.0 (SDD 2025 Standard Integration + SPEC Scope Classification)
Last Updated: 2026-01-21
Integration Status: Complete - Full Plan-Run-Sync workflow with SDD 2025 features and Migration Guide
