spec-workflow

## Sibling skills (local only) Sibling CloudBase skills ship beside this skill. Use local relative paths such as `../auth-tool-cloudbase/SKILL.md`. If a referenced sibling skill file is missing from this environment, ask the user to install the full CloudBase plugin (or the missing skill). Do **not** HTTP-fetch remote skill or protocol markdown into the agent context. # Spec Workflow ## Activation Contract ### Use this first when - The request is a new feature, multi-step product change, cross-module integration, or architecture/design task. - Acceptance criteria are unclear and need to be made explicit before implementation. - The work involves multiple files, user flows, database design, or UI design that needs staged confirmation. ### Read before writing code if - You are unsure whether the task should go straight to coding or should first go through requirements, design, and task planning. - The request mentions a new page, a new system, a redesign, a workflow, or a multi-module refactor. ### Then also read - Frontend page or visual design work -> `../ui-design/SKILL.md` - Advanced data-model work -> `../data-model-creation/SKILL.md` ### Do NOT use for - Small bug fixes with clear scope. - One-file documentation updates. - Straightforward config changes. - Tiny refactors where the user already gave exact implementation instructions. ### Common mistakes / gotchas - Jumping into coding before acceptance criteria are explicit. - Skipping user confirmation between requirements, design, and tasks. - Writing vague tasks that do not map back to user-visible outcomes. - Treating UI work as purely technical implementation without clarifying design intent. ### Minimal checklist - Decide whether the change really needs the full spec flow. - If yes, stop and produce requirements first. - If the change is small, low-risk, and acceptance is already clear, allow direct execution without forcing spec artifacts. - Use EARS-style acceptance criteria. - Get confirmation before moving to the next phase. ## When to use this skill Use this workflow for structured development when you need to: - Define or refine a new feature - Design complex architecture - Coordinate changes across modules - Plan database or UI-heavy work - Improve requirement quality and acceptance boundaries ## Decision rule ### Use the full workflow when - The task is medium or large - The impact spans multiple modules - Acceptance boundaries are fuzzy - The user wants disciplined planning before implementation ### Skip the full workflow when - The task is small, low-risk, and already precise - Goal, scope, and acceptance are already clear enough to execute directly - The user explicitly wants a direct code change with no planning phase ## Core workflow ### Phase 1: Requirements Create `specs/<spec_name>/requirements.md`. What to do: - Restate the problem and scope - Write user stories - Write acceptance criteria in EARS style - Clarify business rules, constraints, and non-goals EARS pattern: ```text While <optional precondition>, when <optional trigger>, the <system name> shall <system response> ``` Example: ```text When the user submits the form, the booking system shall validate required fields before creating the record. ``` ### Phase 2: Design Create `specs/<spec_name>/design.md`. What to do: - Describe architecture and module boundaries - Explain technology choices and trade-offs - Define data model, API, security, and testing strategy as needed - Use Mermaid only when a diagram materially improves clarity ### Phase 3: Tasks Create `specs/<spec_name>/tasks.md`. What to do: - Break the design into executable tasks - Keep tasks specific and reviewable - Link each task back to the relevant requirement - Update task status as work progresses Task format: ```markdown # Implementation Plan - [ ] 1. Task title - Specific work item - Another concrete step - _Requirement: 1 ``` ### Phase 4: Execution Only start implementation after the user confirms the task plan. During execution: - Keep task status current - Finish one meaningful unit at a time - Preserve traceability from change -> task -> requirement ## Working rules for the agent 1. Ask follow-up questions when the request is underspecified; do not guess core product behavior. 2. Require confirmation between requirements, design, and task breakdown. 3. Pull in `ui-design` early when the change includes end-user pages or visual decisions. 4. Keep documents concise but testable. 5. Prefer user-visible outcomes over implementation-detail task names. ## Output expectations - `requirements.md` -> problem, scope, user stories, EARS acceptance criteria - `design.md` -> architecture, technical approach, data/API/security/test notes - `tasks.md` -> actionable implementation checklist tied to requirements