release-specification

---

name: release-specification description: Write production-ready, A+ quality specifications for software releases. Use when planning a release, designing system architecture, or commissioning work to an autonomous agent. Trigger phrases: 'write a release spec', 'spec this feature', 'create a release specification', 'design the architecture', 'ground this in the codebase'.

Write Release Specification Skill

OpenClaw Integration: This skill is invoked by the Dojo Genesis plugin via /dojo spec or /dojo run release-specification. The agent receives project context automatically via the before_agent_start hook. Use dojo_get_context for full state, dojo_save_artifact to persist outputs, and dojo_update_state to record phase transitions and decisions.

Version: 2.1 Created: 2026-02-02 Updated: 2026-02-07 Author: Manus AI Purpose: Write production-ready, A+ quality specifications for software releases

---

I. The Philosophy: Specification as Contract

A specification is not documentation—it is a contract. It is a formal agreement between the architect and the builder about what will be created, how it will work, and what success looks like. A vague specification invites confusion, rework, and failure. A rigorous specification is an act of respect for the builder's time and an investment in quality.

This skill transforms specification writing from a creative exercise into a disciplined engineering practice. By following this structure, we create specifications that are:

• Comprehensive: Every question the builder might have is answered
• Precise: Technical details are specific, not hand-wavy
• Actionable: The path from specification to implementation is clear
• Testable: Success criteria are binary and measurable

The standard: 111/100 (A+). Good enough is not good enough.

---

II. When to Use This Skill

Use this skill when:

• Planning a new software version or release with multiple features or components
• Designing a complex system architecture that requires detailed documentation
• Commissioning work to an autonomous agent (e.g., Claude Code, implementation agents) that needs complete context
• Coordinating parallel development tracks where specifications serve as contracts between teams
• You need to communicate technical vision to stakeholders, developers, or future maintainers

Do not use this skill for:

• Small bug fixes or minor tweaks (use a simple task description instead)
• Exploratory prototypes (use scouting or rapid iteration instead)
• Features that are still being actively designed (finish scouting first)

---

III. The Workflow

Decision Point: Full Template or Lean Format?

Before starting, determine the right spec format:

Use the Full Template (Section IV) when:

• The system is new or the architecture is unfamiliar
• The audience includes stakeholders who need context
• Multiple teams or agents will implement from this spec
• The risk profile is high (production-critical, user-facing)

Use the Lean Format when:

• The architecture is established and the audience is the implementing agent
• The scope is well-defined (single feature, clear boundaries)
• The codebase patterns are well-documented
• The implementing agent is familiar with the codebase

Lean Format structure: Route layouts, component tables, behavior lists. No preamble. "Sonnet level chunks" — direct, precise, implementable.

Rule: The receiving agent should not default to the full template. Match format to scope.

---

Step 1: Gather Context and Inspiration

Before writing, immerse yourself in the problem space:

1. Read previous specifications - Study 2-3 recent specs to understand the pattern and quality bar
2. Review the codebase - Use /repo-context-sync to understand the current architecture
3. Identify the problem - What pain point, user need, or strategic goal is this release addressing?
4. Scout alternatives - Use /strategic-scout if you're choosing between multiple approaches

Output: A clear understanding of the problem, the current state, and the desired future state.

---

Step 1.5: Run Current State Audit

Before writing the spec, measure the codebase. Specs describe the delta from measured reality, not from assumptions.

Run these audits against the target codebase:

Testing

• Test file count: find . -name "*.test.*" | wc -l
• Test framework: [check package.json or equivalent]
• Coverage tool: [check scripts/config]

Accessibility

• Aria/role instances: grep -r "aria-\|role=" --include="*.tsx" | wc -l
• Error boundaries: grep -r "ErrorBoundary" --include="*.tsx" | wc -l

Performance

• Memoization usage: grep -r "React.memo\|useMemo\|useCallback" --include="*.tsx" | wc -l
• Code splitting: grep -r "React.lazy" --include="*.tsx" | wc -l

Dependencies

• UI framework: [check package.json]
• State management: [check package.json]
• Animation library: [check package.json]

File Structure

• Total source files: find src -name "*.ts" -o -name "*.tsx" | wc -l
• Route count: [check router config]

Include the results as a "Current State" section at the top of the spec. The spec then describes what changes FROM this measured baseline.

Key triggers: "codebase audit", "audit before spec", "current state", "ground the spec"

---

Step 2: Draft Vision and Goals

Start with the "why" before the "what":

1. Write a compelling vision statement - A single sentence that captures the essence of this release
2. Explain the core insight - 2-3 paragraphs on why this release matters
3. Define specific, measurable goals - What will be different after this release?
4. List non-goals explicitly - What is out of scope for this release?

Output: A clear, inspiring vision that motivates the work and sets boundaries.

---

Step 3: Design Technical Architecture

This is the heart of the specification:

1. Create a system overview - How do the major components fit together?
2. Design each component in detail - For each major feature/component:
   • Purpose and responsibility
   • Backend implementation (Go, Python, etc.) with code examples
   • Frontend implementation (React, etc.) with code examples
   • API endpoints with request/response shapes
   • Database schema (if applicable)
   • Integration points with existing systems
   • Performance considerations
3. Write production-ready code examples - Not pseudocode, real code that could be committed

Output: A complete technical design that a skilled developer could implement without asking questions.

---

Step 4: Plan Implementation Phases

Break the work into manageable phases:

1. Define a phased approach - 2-4 phases with clear focus areas
2. Create a week-by-week breakdown - Specific, actionable tasks for each week
3. Identify dependencies - What must be done before other work can start?
4. Define the testing strategy - Unit, integration, E2E, performance, and manual QA plans

Output: A realistic timeline with clear milestones and success criteria for each phase.

---

Step 5: Assess Risks and Document

Anticipate what could go wrong:

1. Identify major risks - Technical, timeline, or integration risks
2. Define mitigation strategies - How will you reduce or eliminate each risk?
3. Plan rollback procedures - How will you safely undo this release if needed?
4. Define monitoring and alerts - How will you know if something goes wrong in production?
5. Document user and developer documentation needs - What needs to be written?

Output: A comprehensive risk assessment and contingency plan.

---

Step 6: Review Against Checklist

Before finalizing:

1. Run the quality checklist (Section VI) - Ensure every item is ✅
2. Get feedback - Share with a peer or stakeholder
3. Iterate - Refine based on feedback
4. Commit to repository - Save in docs/vX.X.X/ with a clear filename

Output: A finalized, A+ quality specification ready for implementation.

---

IV. The A+ Specification Template

# [Project Name] v[X.X.X]: [Memorable Tagline]

**Author:** [Your Name]
**Status:** [Draft | Final | Approved]
**Created:** [Date]
**Grounded In:** [What this builds on - previous versions, research, feedback]

---

## 1. Vision

> A single, compelling sentence that captures the essence of this release.

**The Core Insight:**

[2-3 paragraphs explaining WHY this release matters, what problem it solves, and how it advances the overall vision]

**What Makes This Different:**

[2-3 paragraphs explaining what makes this approach unique, innovative, or better than alternatives]

---

## 1.5 Current State (Audit Results)

> Include measured codebase metrics here. This grounds the spec in reality.

**Testing:** [X] test files, [framework], [coverage tool]
**Accessibility:** [X] aria/role instances, [X] error boundaries
**Performance:** [X] memoization instances, [X] code splitting instances
**Dependencies:** [list key deps from package.json]
**File Structure:** [X] source files, [X] routes, [X] shared components

---

## 2. Goals & Success Criteria

**Primary Goals:**
1. [Specific, measurable goal]
2. [Specific, measurable goal]
3. [Specific, measurable goal]

**Success Criteria:**
- ✅ [Concrete, testable criterion]
- ✅ [Concrete, testable criterion]
- ✅ [Concrete, testable criterion]

**Non-Goals (Out of Scope):**
- ❌ [What this release explicitly does NOT include]
- ❌ [What is deferred to future versions]

---

## 3. Technical Architecture

### 3.1 System Overview

[High-level diagram or description of how components fit together]

**Key Components:**
1. **[Component Name]** - [Purpose and responsibility]
2. **[Component Name]** - [Purpose and responsibility]
3. **[Component Name]** - [Purpose and responsibility]

### 3.2 [Feature/Component 1] - Detailed Design

**Purpose:** [What this component does and why it's needed]

**Architecture:**

[Detailed explanation with diagrams if helpful]

**Backend Implementation (Go):**

```go
// Complete, production-ready code example
package [package_name]

type [StructName] struct {
    Field1 string `json:"field1"`
    Field2 int    `json:"field2"`
}

func (s *[StructName]) [MethodName]() error {
    // Implementation with error handling
    return nil
}

Frontend Implementation (React/TypeScript):

// Complete, production-ready code example
interface [InterfaceName] {
  field1: string;
  field2: number;
}

export const [ComponentName]: React.FC<Props> = ({ prop1, prop2 }) => {
  const [state, setState] = useState<StateType>(initialState);

  // Implementation

  return (
    <div className="...">
      {/* JSX */}
    </div>
  );
};

API Endpoints:

Method	Endpoint	Request	Response	Purpose
POST	/api/v1/[resource]	{ field: value }	{ id: string }	[Description]
GET	/api/v1/[resource]/:id	-	{ data: object }	[Description]

Database Schema (if applicable):

CREATE TABLE [table_name] (
    id TEXT PRIMARY KEY,
    field1 TEXT NOT NULL,
    field2 INTEGER DEFAULT 0,
    created_at TIMESTAMP DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP
);

CREATE INDEX idx_[field] ON [table_name]([field]);

Integration Points:

• Integrates with [existing component] via [method]
• Depends on [existing service] for [functionality]
• Extends [existing pattern] from v[X.X.X]

Performance Considerations:

• [Specific optimization or constraint]
• [Caching strategy or database indexing]
• [Expected latency or throughput]

3.3 [Feature/Component 2] - Detailed Design

[Repeat structure for each major component]

---

4. Implementation Plan

4.1 Phased Approach

Timeline: [X] weeks

Phase	Duration	Focus	Deliverables
1	Week 1-2	[Focus area]	[Specific deliverables]
2	Week 3-4	[Focus area]	[Specific deliverables]
3	Week 5-6	[Focus area]	[Specific deliverables]

4.2 Week-by-Week Breakdown

Week 1: [Focus]

• Task 1: [Specific, actionable task]
• Task 2: [Specific, actionable task]
• Task 3: [Specific, actionable task]

Success Criteria: [What "done" looks like for this week]

Week 2: [Focus] [Repeat structure]

[Continue for all weeks]

4.3 Dependencies & Prerequisites

Required Before Starting:

• ✅ [Prerequisite 1]
• ✅ [Prerequisite 2]

Parallel Work:

• [What can be developed simultaneously]

Blocking Dependencies:

• [What must be completed before other work can start]

4.4 Testing Strategy

Unit Tests:

• [Component/module to test]
• Target coverage: [X]%

Integration Tests:

• [Integration point to test]
• [Expected behavior]

E2E Tests:

• [User flow to test]
• [Success criteria]

Performance Tests:

• [Metric to measure]
• Target: [Specific number]

Manual QA:

• [Scenario to test manually]
• [Edge cases to verify]

---

5. Risk Assessment & Mitigation

Risk	Likelihood	Impact	Mitigation Strategy
[Risk description]	High/Med/Low	High/Med/Low	[Specific mitigation]
[Risk description]	High/Med/Low	High/Med/Low	[Specific mitigation]

---

6. Rollback & Contingency

Feature Flags:

• [flag_name]: Controls [feature], default: false

Rollback Procedure:

1. [Step 1]
2. [Step 2]
3. [Step 3]

Monitoring & Alerts:

• [Metric to monitor]: Alert if [condition]
• [Error rate]: Alert if > [threshold]

---

7. Documentation & Communication

User-Facing Documentation:

• Update user guide with [new feature]
• Create tutorial for [workflow]

Developer Documentation:

• Update API documentation
• Document new database schema
• Add code examples to README

Release Notes:

• Prepare changelog
• Highlight breaking changes (if any)
• Include migration guide (if needed)

---

8. Appendices

8.1 Related Work & Inspiration

• [Project/Paper]: [What we learned from it]
• [Tool/System]: [How it influenced this design]

8.2 Future Considerations

v[X+1] Candidates:

• [Feature that didn't make this release but is planned]
• [Enhancement that can build on this foundation]

8.3 Open Questions

• [Question that needs resolution before or during implementation]
• [Decision that can be made during development]

8.4 References

1. [Link to related spec]
2. [Link to research paper]
3. [Link to GitHub issue or discussion]

---

## V. Best Practices

### 1. Start with Vision, Not Features

**Why:** Features without vision are just a list of tasks. Vision provides meaning and direction.

**How:** Write the vision statement first. If you can't articulate why this release matters in one sentence, you're not ready to write the spec.

---

### 2. Write Production-Ready Code Examples

**Why:** Pseudocode leaves too much room for interpretation. Real code is a contract.

**How:** Write code examples that could be committed to the repository. Include imports, error handling, and types.

---

### 3. Use Realistic Timelines Based on Complexity

**Why:** Underestimating timelines leads to rushed work and technical debt.

**How:** Use past releases as benchmarks. A 1,000-line feature typically takes 1-2 weeks, not 2 days.

---

### 4. Document Integration Points Explicitly

**Why:** Most bugs happen at the boundaries between systems.

**How:** For every new component, explicitly document how it connects to existing systems (APIs, props, state, events).

---

### 5. Include Risk Mitigation from the Start

**Why:** Identifying risks after implementation is too late.

**How:** During the architecture phase, ask "What could go wrong?" and document mitigation strategies.

---

### 6. Make Success Criteria Binary and Testable

**Why:** Ambiguous success criteria lead to scope creep and endless iteration.

**How:** Every success criterion should be a yes/no question. "The user can create a new project" is testable. "The UI is intuitive" is not.

---

### 7. Reference Existing Patterns

**Why:** Consistency reduces cognitive load and makes the codebase easier to maintain.

**How:** When designing a new component, reference an existing component that follows the same pattern. "Follow the structure of `ComponentX`."

---

## VI. Quality Checklist

Before finalizing a specification, verify:

### Vision & Goals (3 questions)
- [ ] Is the vision statement a single, compelling sentence?
- [ ] Are the goals specific, measurable, and achievable?
- [ ] Are non-goals explicitly stated to prevent scope creep?

### Technical Architecture (4 questions)
- [ ] Does every major component have a detailed design with code examples?
- [ ] Are all API endpoints fully specified (method, path, request, response)?
- [ ] Are integration points with existing systems documented?
- [ ] Are performance considerations addressed?

### Implementation Plan (3 questions)
- [ ] Is the timeline realistic based on the complexity of the work?
- [ ] Does the week-by-week breakdown include specific, actionable tasks?
- [ ] Is the testing strategy comprehensive (unit, integration, E2E, performance)?

### Risk & Documentation (3 questions)
- [ ] Have major risks been identified with mitigation strategies?
- [ ] Is there a rollback procedure in case of failure?
- [ ] Are user and developer documentation needs documented?

**If you cannot answer "yes" to all 13 questions, the specification is not ready.**

---

## VII. Example: Dojo Genesis v0.0.23

**The Problem:** Users needed a way to calibrate the agent's behavior and communication style to match their preferences.

**The Vision:** "The Collaborative Calibration" - A release that transforms the agent from a fixed personality into an adaptive partner.

**What Made It A+:**

1. **Clear Vision:** The tagline "Collaborative Calibration" immediately communicated the essence
2. **Comprehensive Architecture:** Detailed design of the calibration UI, backend storage, and agent integration
3. **Production-Ready Code:** Complete Go and TypeScript examples that could be implemented directly
4. **Realistic Timeline:** 3-week phased approach with weekly milestones
5. **Risk Mitigation:** Identified the risk of "calibration drift" and defined a validation mechanism

**Key Decisions:**
- Store calibration preferences in SQLite for local-first architecture
- Use a multi-dimensional calibration model (tone, verbosity, formality)
- Implement real-time preview of calibration changes

**Outcome:** The specification was commissioned to Claude Code and implemented in 2.5 weeks with minimal rework.

---

## VIII. Common Pitfalls to Avoid

❌ **Vague Goals:** "Improve user experience" → ✅ "Reduce context loading time by 50%"
❌ **Missing Code Examples:** High-level description only → ✅ Complete, runnable code
❌ **Unrealistic Timelines:** "2 days for full backend" → ✅ "2 weeks with phased approach"
❌ **No Risk Assessment:** Assumes everything will work → ✅ Identifies risks and mitigations
❌ **Incomplete Testing:** "We'll test it" → ✅ Specific test cases and coverage targets
❌ **No Integration Points:** Treats feature as isolated → ✅ Documents how it connects to existing system

---

## IX. Related Skills

- **`strategic-to-tactical-workflow`** - The complete workflow from scouting to implementation (this skill is Phase 6)
- **`frontend-from-backend`** - For frontend specs that need deep backend grounding
- **`implementation-prompt`** - For converting this spec into implementation prompts
- **`parallel-tracks`** - For splitting large specs into parallel execution tracks
- **`repo-context-sync`** - For gathering codebase context before writing specs
- **`memory-garden`** - For documenting learnings from implementation
- **`seed-extraction`** - For extracting reusable patterns from specs

---

## X. Skill Metadata

**Token Savings:** ~10,000-15,000 tokens per specification (no need to re-read old specs for patterns)
**Quality Impact:** Ensures consistency across all specifications
**Maintenance:** Update when new patterns emerge from successful releases

**When to Update This Skill:**
- After completing 3-5 new specifications (to incorporate new patterns)
- When a specification leads to significant rework (to identify what was missing)
- When commissioning to a new type of agent (to adapt the template)

---

**Last Updated:** 2026-02-07
**Maintained By:** Manus AI
**Status:** Active

---

## OpenClaw Tool Integration

When running inside the Dojo Genesis plugin:

1. **Start** by calling `dojo_get_context` to retrieve full project state, history, and artifacts
2. **During** the skill execution, follow the workflow steps as documented above
3. **Save** all outputs using `dojo_save_artifact` with appropriate artifact types:
   - `scout` → type: "scout-report"
   - `spec` → type: "specification"
   - `tracks` → type: "track-decomposition"
   - `commission` → type: "implementation-prompt"
   - `retro` → type: "retrospective"
4. **Update state** by calling `dojo_update_state` to:
   - Record the skill execution in activity history
   - Advance the project phase if appropriate
   - Log any decisions made during the skill run