メニュー
Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the project issue tracker — no interview, just synthesis of what you've already discussed.
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
SOC 職業分類に基づく
| name | to-spec |
| description | Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the project issue tracker — no interview, just synthesis of what you've already discussed. |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
| metadata | {"internal":true} |
This skill takes the current conversation context and codebase understanding and produces a spec (you may know this document as a PRD). Do NOT interview the user — just synthesize what you already know.
The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you — run /setup-matt-pocock-skills if not.
Explore the repo to understand the current state of the codebase, if you haven't already. Use the project's domain glossary vocabulary throughout the spec, and respect any ADRs in the area you're touching.
Sketch out the seams at which you're going to test the feature. Existing seams should be preferred to new ones. Use the highest seam possible. If new seams are needed, propose them at the highest point you can. The fewer seams across the codebase, the better - the ideal number is one.
Check with the user that these seams match their expectations.
ready-for-agent triage label - no need for additional triage.The problem that the user is facing, from the user's perspective.
The solution to the problem, from the user's perspective.
A LONG, numbered list of user stories. Each user story should be in the format of:
This list of user stories should be extremely extensive and cover all aspects of the feature.
A list of implementation decisions that were made. This can include:
Do NOT include specific file paths or code snippets. They may end up being outdated very quickly.
Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it within the relevant decision and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts — not a working demo, just the important bits.
A list of testing decisions that were made. Include:
A description of the things that are out of scope for this spec.
Any further notes about the feature.
Run one scheduled cloud-routine fire: pick the oldest open `ready-for-agent` issue, drive it to a merge-ready PR, and STOP at the merge gate without merging. Composes `ship`. Use only when running the scheduled cloud ship routine for Gharib89/crm (the routine prompt invokes this skill by name); not for an interactive `/ship`.
Review inbound agent-shipped PRs at the merge gate — drift checklist, targeted live e2e, fix-in-place, review-bot iteration (Copilot + CodeRabbit) — leaving each PR merge-confident (gate-passed) or explicitly failed (gate-failed).
Take a tracker issue to a merge-ready PR in one unattended run, stopping only at a human merge gate. Composes the `tdd` and `code-review` skills. Use when the user wants to ship an issue or take an issue through to a PR; also invoked by the cloud ship routine.
Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the skills in this repo.
Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes — Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/PRD asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to "review since X".
Shared vocabulary for designing deep modules. Use when the user wants to design or improve a module's interface, find deepening opportunities, decide where a seam goes, make code more testable or AI-navigable, or when another skill needs the deep-module vocabulary.