| name | ospec-change |
| description | Create or advance a lightweight OSpec change using the classic fast workflow. |
| tags | ["ospec","cli","workflow"] |
OSpec Change
Use this skill for small or routine requirements where the classic OSpec 1.0 change flow is enough.
Scope
This skill is the fast change lifecycle inside an initialized OSpec project:
- requirement intake
- change naming or matching
- proposal and task refinement
- implementation guidance
- verification
- archive readiness check
- finalize closeout
Use ospec-goal instead when the work needs design docs, implementation planning, task graph dispatch, parallel workers, document review, evidence artifacts, or full review gates.
Read Order
.skillrc.ospec/SKILL.index.json for nested projects, or root SKILL.index.json for legacy classic projects.ospec/for-ai/ai-guide.md for nested projects, or legacy for-ai/ai-guide.md.ospec/for-ai/execution-protocol.md for nested projects, or legacy for-ai/execution-protocol.md.ospec/changes/active/<change>/proposal.md for nested projects, or legacy changes/active/<change>/proposal.md.ospec/changes/active/<change>/tasks.md for nested projects, or legacy changes/active/<change>/tasks.md.ospec/changes/active/<change>/state.json for nested projects, or legacy changes/active/<change>/state.json.ospec/changes/active/<change>/verification.md for nested projects, or legacy changes/active/<change>/verification.md.ospec/changes/active/<change>/review.md for nested projects, or legacy changes/active/<change>/review.md
Language
- Follow the project-adopted document language from managed
for-ai/ guidance, .skillrc documentLanguage, and existing change docs.
- Write every change document you author (
proposal.md, tasks.md, verification.md, review.md, and brainstorm content) in that one language. Do not mix Chinese and English within a change.
- Keep Chinese projects in Chinese unless the repo explicitly adopts English.
Visibility & Decisions
Announce-Before-Act: never run the change flow silently. Announce in one line which skill you are using (ospec-change) and the current stage, which ospec command you are about to run and the artifact it writes, and which gate is blocking when progress stops.Brainstorm-First: before implementing, confirm scope and acceptance with the user when anything is ambiguous, and ask one question at a time instead of silently assuming direction, API, UI, risk, or scope. Record the agreed scope in proposal.md rather than guessing. NEVER auto-select the recommended option or resolve a decision gate yourself — recommended is only a hint to show the user; present every gate and wait for the user's actual choice instead of running the change in one shot. Present each open decision using the best interactive mechanism your harness has — a native question UI (Claude Code AskUserQuestion, Gemini ask_user) if available, otherwise your plan/approval UI (Codex Plan mode) if available, otherwise plain chat text — you always ask the user, only the presentation differs. When you run ospec brainstorm, do not leave it as an unanswered template: ask the user the decision gates and record each answer with ospec brainstorm resolve [path] --brainstorm <id> --gate <gate-id> --select <option-id> so the brainstorm has a result.Zero-Setup: the user only describes the change; you run every ospec command yourself and never ask them to type setup or execution commands. In a Claude Code harness, if .claude/settings.json does not yet reference .ospec/hooks/claude/ospec-claude-hook.cjs, run ospec session hook --target claude --apply once (idempotent).
Required Logic
- Inspect repository state first when posture is unclear.
- If the repo is not initialized, stop at initialization guidance instead of forcing a change.
- If the request is a new requirement, derive a concise kebab-case change name and create it with
ospec new <change-name> [path].
- If the matching active change already exists, continue it instead of duplicating it.
- Keep the work inside the active change container.
- Keep
proposal.md, tasks.md, state.json, verification.md, and review.md aligned with actual execution.
- Do not create
design.md, implementation-plan.md, task graphs, worker packets, or review artifacts for routine small changes.
- Use
ospec-goal when the requirement is complex enough to need the full workflow.
- Use OSpec closeout commands instead of inventing a parallel process.
- Closeout is automatic when ready: once implementation,
verification.md, and review.md are aligned and ospec verify [changes/active/<change>] passes, run ospec finalize [changes/active/<change>] yourself. Do not stop at ospec archive ... --check (it is a preview only) and do not wait for the user to ask before archiving. Closeout uses direct-closeout (archive locally, no PR) and manual merge as defaults — do NOT ask the user about PR, merge, branch, or worktree strategy; uncommitted change/OSpec files in the working tree are normal and do not block archive. Only open a PR if the user explicitly asked. Only pause closeout when a gate genuinely needs a human: a pending required user decision, an unapproved blocking plugin gate (e.g. Checkpoint), real blockers reported by verify or archive, or an explicit user request to preview or approve before archiving.
Commands
ospec status [path]
ospec new <change-name> [path]
ospec changes status [path]
ospec progress [changes/active/<change>]
ospec verify [changes/active/<change>]
ospec archive [changes/active/<change>] --check
ospec finalize [changes/active/<change>]
Guardrails
- Do not assume dashboard workflows exist.
- Do not confuse repository initialization with change execution.
- Do not enter queue mode unless the user explicitly asks for queue behavior.
- Do not escalate to the full goal workflow unless the work is complex, cross-cutting, high-risk, or explicitly requested as a goal.
- Do not claim completion until implementation, verification notes, and closeout status are aligned.
- If real project tests exist, run or recommend them separately from
ospec verify.
