| name | spec-kit-discussion-handoff-review |
| description | Review an agent-only discussion requirement contract before it becomes ready or is consumed downstream. |
Discussion Contract Review
Use when sp-discussion asks for final review, a user requests changes, or sp-specify/sp-quick reports contract integrity failure.
Authority
Review .specify/discussions/<slug>/handoff-to-specify.json. It is the only handoff authority. Do not require, generate, or compare a Markdown companion.
Human-facing explanation belongs in the visible reply; the contract remains schema-first and agent-only.
Read supporting discussion-state.md, requirements.md, technical-options.md, project-context.md, or open-questions.md only when a named source-evidence ref is stale, missing, contradictory, or required to repair a specific field. Do not sweep them by default.
Review Order
- Goal and in/out/deferred scope.
- Context boundary and implementation target.
- Evidence authority, stale conditions, hard/soft unknowns, and conflicts.
- Selected direction, accepted tradeoffs, and only rejected alternatives that could reappear.
- Success criteria and downstream planning constraints.
MP-*, CA-###, dependencies, and stop/reopen conditions.- Consumer eligibility, coverage/planning gates, and protected digest.
Verdict
Return one structured verdict:
approve: no semantic or integrity blocker;request-changes: name exact JSON refs and required corrections;blocked: name cause, owner, safe retry, and stop condition.
For the visible human review, explain the decision being requested, scope and exclusions, readiness checks, protected review criteria, carry-forward coverage, blocking issues, required changes, and next action. The agent chooses the visible headings and layout; no fixed review card is required.
Deterministic field/schema/digest failures are repaired through {{specify-subcmd:specify-runtime discussion validate-handoff}} and sp-discussion. Review judgment must not silently patch upstream truth.
After changes, recompute the digest and require confirmation of the current revision. Do not treat confirmation of an older digest as approval.
Minimum-Sufficient Rule
Keep a field only when omitting it can change downstream action, lose a requirement or obligation, force rediscovery, weaken validation, or prevent safe recovery. Remove presentation prose, duplicated history, and fields irrelevant to eligible consumers.
