clarification-strategies

name	clarification-strategies
description	Strategies for auditing specifications and reducing ambiguity. Use when running `/sddp-clarify` or whenever an agent needs to critique a requirement.

Clarification Strategies

Ambiguity Audit Patterns

Patterns to identify weak requirements in spec.md:

1. The "Adverb Trap"

Pattern: "quickly", "easily", "efficiently", "seamlessly". Critique: "Define 'quickly'. <200ms? <1s? Define 'easily'. How many clicks?" Goal: Convert subjective adverbs to measurable metrics.

2. The Passive Voice

Pattern: "The user is notified..." / "The data is processed..." Critique: "WHO notifies? Email? SMS? Toast? WHAT processes? Background job? Synchronous call?" Goal: Identify specific actor and mechanism.

3. The "Unspecified Scale"

Pattern: "Handle user uploads" without size limits. Critique: "Max file size? Allowed types? Expected concurrency?" Goal: Define boundary constraints for Plan phase.

4. The "Missing Failure Mode"

Pattern: "User logs in successfully." Critique: "Wrong password? Locked account? DB down?" Goal: Ensure error paths defined in User Scenarios.

5. The "Scope Creep" Detector

Pattern: "Integration with 3rd party providers" (plural) when one suffices for MVP. Critique: "Which specific providers for V1? Can we limit to one?" Goal: Narrow scope, reduce complexity.

Questioning Protocol

When generating questions:

1. Group by Impact: Security > Scope > UX > Technical.
2. Propose a Default: "Should we default to JWT for auth, or do you have a specific requirement?"
3. Limit Volume: Max 8 critical questions at a time.
4. Reference Lines: Point to specific line in spec.md where ambiguity exists.